Cabinet asset declarations kept secret by Abela

In a move that has triggered widespread criticism among transparency advocates and press freedom organisations, Malta’s Prime Minister Robert Abela has stood firm on his refusal to publish the annual declarations of assets submitted by Cabinet members, including his own. This decision breaks with a long-standing practice spanning more than three decades, during which Maltese governments of various political leanings consistently made such records available to the public.

Despite being presented with a formal challenge by The Shift, an independent investigative news outlet, Abela has continued to assert that these declarations are internal documents and should remain confidential. The refusal to disclose the 2023 declarations has raised fresh concerns over transparency and accountability in public office, while also placing Abela under renewed public and institutional scrutiny.

The official position from the Prime Minister's Office

In response to the Freedom of Information (FOI) request filed by The Shift, the Prime Minister communicated his position via the Director General of the Office of the Prime Minister, John Abela. The reply argued that the asset declarations were intended solely for internal government use. According to this view, the documentation serves as a tool to assist the Prime Minister in overseeing ethical standards within the executive branch.

“These declarations are not created for public circulation,” the statement read. “They are internal documents that help the Prime Minister carry out ethical oversight within the Executive. While they are formally received by the Cabinet Secretary, this is part of a process that remains fully within government and is intended to support internal accountability.”

This interpretation of the function of asset declarations significantly diverges from the long-standing public expectation and historical precedent that such disclosures are a vital tool for public scrutiny, particularly in democratic systems with functioning checks and balances.

The Information and Data Protection Commissioner’s role

The Information and Data Protection Commissioner is currently reviewing a complaint lodged by The Shift under the Freedom of Information Act. The complaint argues that the refusal to publish these declarations contradicts democratic norms and the principle of open governance.

The investigation is ongoing. However, the matter has already attracted the attention of civil society organisations and legal experts who maintain that transparency concerning the financial interests of elected officials is not only a democratic imperative but also essential to preventing conflicts of interest and abuse of power.

Abela’s past approach to asset declarations

When Robert Abela first assumed office as Prime Minister in January 2020, he did not object to the public release of his asset declarations. In fact, during his first year in office, the declarations were published without controversy. However, a shift in approach became evident when journalists and opposition figures began questioning discrepancies between Abela’s reported financial standing and his apparent lifestyle and property acquisitions.

Critics have pointed to specific acquisitions and transactions that appear inconsistent with the income levels publicly declared by Abela, leading to heightened public interest in verifying the authenticity and completeness of the asset statements.

Inconsistencies and public statements

The issue escalated in December 2023, when Abela was asked in Parliament to submit his asset declaration for that year, in line with established procedure. Initially, he claimed the declarations had already been made and were available for public scrutiny. However, a subsequent verification revealed that the documents had not been released.

When questioned further, Abela altered his stance, refusing to publish the declarations unless a broader reform was introduced. He stated that changes to the system of asset declaration would encompass both government and opposition MPs and would be implemented imminently. In January 2024, he reiterated that reform was imminent. Yet, to date, no such reform has been initiated or publicly proposed.

The Cabinet Secretary’s deviation from protocol

According to the established Cabinet Procedures Manual, it is the duty of the Cabinet Secretary—presently Ryan Spagnol—to provide access to these declarations for examination when formally requested. However, in this instance, Spagnol chose not to comply with that protocol and instead deferred to the Prime Minister’s directive.

This refusal to act in accordance with established norms has drawn criticism from legal experts and good governance advocates. Many argue that the independence and procedural integrity of the Cabinet Secretary’s office is essential to maintaining transparency and preventing undue executive influence.

Standards Commissioner takes a formal position

The Standards in Public Life Commissioner, a statutory authority responsible for monitoring ethical conduct in public office, has already censured Prime Minister Abela for his refusal to publish the declarations. The Commissioner formally recommended that the declarations be published without further delay, in keeping with democratic standards and public expectations.

Despite this, Abela has not complied. His persistent refusal to release the declarations has raised concerns about executive overreach and the erosion of institutional checks on political power.

Public reaction and implications for governance

The continued secrecy surrounding Cabinet members' financial declarations has fuelled public suspicion and debate about the state of transparency in Malta. For a country already grappling with reputational issues concerning governance and the rule of law—particularly following the assassination of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia and the subsequent public inquiry—such moves are seen by many as further erosion of public trust in institutions.

Observers note that transparency in financial matters is not merely symbolic. It is a key safeguard against corruption and improper conduct in public office. When governments disclose asset declarations, they provide assurance to the public that elected officials are not exploiting their positions for private benefit. The refusal to publish such documents undermines that assurance and could have long-term implications for democratic governance.

Legal perspectives and potential challenges

While the Prime Minister has maintained that his position is legally sound, some legal experts disagree. They argue that the Freedom of Information Act, when read in light of Malta’s constitutional principles and the public’s right to know, may support the disclosure of asset declarations.

Moreover, they note that such declarations are distinct from confidential security or intelligence records; they are, by nature, accountability mechanisms. A blanket refusal to publish them could potentially be subject to judicial review, particularly if the Information and Data Protection Commissioner ultimately rules against the government.

Conclusion

The ongoing standoff over Cabinet asset declarations has become more than a bureaucratic dispute. It has evolved into a broader test of Malta’s commitment to democratic values, institutional accountability, and the rule of law.

As the Commissioner’s investigation continues, all eyes remain on Prime Minister Abela and his next steps. His administration’s response will not only determine whether the public will regain access to this important transparency mechanism but will also signal whether democratic institutions in Malta can withstand pressures that seek to limit public oversight of elected officials.

Until then, the case continues to raise critical questions about the balance of power, the responsibilities of public office, and the meaning of accountability in a modern European democracy.

FAQs

What is the controversy surrounding Prime Minister Robert Abela and asset declarations?
The controversy stems from his refusal to publish annual declarations of assets submitted by Cabinet members, breaking a 30-year tradition in Malta.

Why are asset declarations important in a democracy?
They help ensure accountability by revealing potential conflicts of interest or unexplained wealth among elected officials.

Did Prime Minister Abela always refuse to publish asset declarations?
No, when he first became Prime Minister in 2020, he did publish them. His stance changed after questions were raised about discrepancies in his own declarations.

What legal basis is the Prime Minister using to justify withholding the documents?
He claims that the declarations are internal government tools and not intended for public circulation.

Is there an official complaint about this refusal?
Yes, The Shift filed a complaint with the Information and Data Protection Commissioner under the Freedom of Information Act.

Has the Standards Commissioner commented on the matter?
Yes, the Standards Commissioner has formally urged Abela to publish the asset declarations without further delay.

What is the role of the Cabinet Secretary in this process?
The Cabinet Secretary is supposed to release the declarations upon request, but in this case, has followed Abela’s directive not to disclose them.

Have any reforms been introduced as Abela promised?
No reforms have been introduced to date, despite repeated public statements that changes were imminent.

Can this decision be challenged in court?
Legal experts suggest that judicial review could be an option if the Information Commissioner rules that the documents must be disclosed.

What impact could this have on public trust in Malta?
The ongoing refusal could damage trust in public institutions and raise concerns about executive overreach and the weakening of democratic norms.