The limits of official transparency in Malta and Cyprus

Many aspects of gover­nance have come under scrutiny in recent years, partic­u­larly in Malta and Cyprus, where the call for official trans­parency has gained signif­icant momentum. The push for trans­parency is crucial in fostering good gover­nance, combating corruption, and enhancing public trust. However, both countries face limita­tions that can hinder these objec­tives, resulting in a challenging landscape for journalists, citizens, and account­ability advocates.

In Malta, the assas­si­nation of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia in 2017 shed light on the issues surrounding govern­mental opacity. Caruana Galizia was known for her inves­tigative work into corruption and financial irreg­u­lar­ities involving high-profile politi­cians. Following her murder, there was a palpable wave of public outcry, resulting in calls for improved government trans­parency and account­ability. The Maltese government intro­duced numerous reforms, but many believe that these changes have not gone far enough to eliminate the entrenched cultures of secrecy and impunity.

One particular area where trans­parency falters in Malta is in access to infor­mation requests. The Freedom of Infor­mation Act (FOIA) exists to grant citizens the ability to request infor­mation from public bodies. However, there have been numerous instances where requests have been denied or met with bureau­cratic delays. Critics argue that there are loopholes in the law that allow author­ities to withhold infor­mation under broad categories, such as national security or public interest, which can be inter­preted subjec­tively.

On the other hand, Cyprus has faced its own challenges regarding trans­parency. The country has been grappling with issues tied to its banking sector, partic­u­larly following the financial crisis in 2013. The fallout from the crisis led to an increased focus on imple­menting checks and balances to enhance trans­parency. Never­theless, systemic issues plague the appli­cation and enforcement of existing trans­parency measures. Public insti­tu­tions often lack the resources to effec­tively manage trans­parency protocols, while bureau­cratic ineffi­ciency further exacer­bates the problem.

In Cyprus, the public’s right to access infor­mation is also protected by legis­lation; however, the practical appli­cation of this right is often hindered. Many citizens find it difficult to obtain infor­mation as a result of excessive red tape, leading to frustration and a sense of disil­lu­sionment towards government insti­tu­tions. The cultural backdrop in Cyprus, which tends to favor discretion and confi­den­tiality within government dealings, often results in insuf­fi­cient scrutiny of processes that should be more trans­parent.

Both Malta and Cyprus are part of the European Union, which empha­sizes principles of trans­parency and account­ability in gover­nance. However, the imple­men­tation of these principles remains incon­sistent. In response, various civil society organi­za­tions are actively advocating for greater trans­parency and account­ability within their respective govern­ments. Initia­tives focused on public awareness and education about citizens’ rights to infor­mation have gained traction, aiming to empower the populace to demand more from their leaders.

In the final account, despite the potential for progress, the limits of official trans­parency in Malta and Cyprus continue to pose challenges. The balance between national interests and the public’s right to know is delicate, requiring sustained effort from both govern­ments and citizens to promote a more open gover­nance model. Only with persistent pressure and advocacy can these limits be challenged effec­tively, leading to improved trans­parency and account­ability in the future.