EU Golden Passports raise concerns over sovereignty and security
By Jennifer Hicks
The sale of citizenship has emerged as a contentious issue within the European Union (EU), raising significant questions about national sovereignty, security, and the integrity of the European passport.
The legal opinion recently issued by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) advocate general, Irish lawyer Anthony Collins, has thrown the spotlight back on Malta’s “golden passport” scheme, reigniting discussions about the implications of such practices across the EU.
The European Commission is currently suing Malta in the ECJ in Luxembourg, claiming that the country’s citizenship by investment program violates EU laws on “sincere cooperation.” The Commission argues that by selling citizenship without requiring a genuine connection to Malta, the program undermines the integrity of EU citizenship and creates avenues for potential abuses.
However, Collins’ opinion complicates this narrative. He stated that the Commission had failed to demonstrate that EU law mandates a genuine or prior link for lawful citizenship grants.
He emphasized that the issue of nationality is fundamentally tied to the sovereignty and national identity of member states, a principle enshrined in the EU treaty.
The implications of this opinion are significant; if the ECJ ultimately agrees, it could pave the way for other EU nations to implement similar programs without fear of legal repercussions.
Currently, Malta stands as the only EU nation that continues to sell citizenship following the discontinuation of similar schemes in Cyprus and Bulgaria due to rising concerns over transparency and security.
The Maltese scheme reportedly requires a financial investment of around €1.3 million, providing passport holders with access to live, work, and study anywhere within the EU, along with visa-free travel to over 180 countries, including the United States.
This lucrative opportunity has attracted the attention of passport-brokering firms, with Henley & Partners, a London-based company, expressing that this case is one of the most crucial constitutional matters the ECJ has faced in recent years.
The outcome will have ramifications for all EU member states, potentially encouraging them to exploit similar citizenship sales as a means of bolstering national revenues.
The controversial nature of golden passport schemes stems from concerns regarding their attractiveness to individuals with questionable backgrounds. The Maltese program, along with the now-defunct Cypriot initiative, faced scrutiny over the possibility that wealthy individuals from high-risk countries could exploit these schemes as backdoors into the EU.
Notably, allegations surfaced that individuals associated with sanctions evasion, money laundering, and organized crime were taking advantage of these citizenship opportunities.
Despite these concerns, Henley & Partners distanced itself from issues of security, asserting that such matters were beyond their scope.
The reluctance to address potential risks associated with these programs raises alarms about the lack of oversight and regulation surrounding citizenship sales.
Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a staunch critic of perceived EU overreach, has also re-entered the conversation by reinstating a golden visa scheme that offers 10-year residency permits for as little as €250,000.
This program is particularly concerning, as it opens the door for high-risk individuals from Belarus, China, and Russia to gain access to the EU under less stringent conditions.
The Hungarian initiative underscores the broader trend among EU states of offering pathways to residency and citizenship based on financial investment, often at the expense of rigorous vetting processes.
In September, German liberal MEP Joachim Streit challenged Hungary’s approach in a European Parliament hearing, questioning the potential risks associated with commodifying citizenship and residency.
Hungary is not isolated in its efforts to sell access to the EU. Several other member states, including Greece, Portugal, and Spain, offer long-term residency permits in exchange for substantial investments, typically ranging from €500,000 to €1 million.
These schemes contribute to a burgeoning market for “golden tickets,” which have facilitated the entry of approximately 132,000 individuals into the EU between 2011 and 2019, generating an impressive €21.4 billion for national treasuries, as reported in a recent European Parliament study.
However, the varied nature of these programs raises concerns about the criteria and conditions under which citizenship or residency is granted.
As stated in the European Parliament report, “most member states have some form of investment or entrepreneur scheme in place,” yet the specifics can differ significantly from one country to another, leading to inconsistencies in the vetting process.
The broader implications of Collins’ opinion and the ongoing debate about golden passports touch upon fundamental issues of national sovereignty.
Member states have long maintained that the authority to regulate nationality and citizenship rests within their exclusive domain.
The notion that the EU could dictate the terms under which countries issue passports is seen as a potential infringement on their sovereign rights.
This sentiment is echoed by Orbán, who has positioned himself as a defender of Hungary’s autonomy against perceived EU encroachments. The Hungarian government’s reintroduction of its golden visa scheme has drawn both domestic and international criticism, yet it also resonates with a growing sentiment among several EU nations that prioritize economic benefits over stringent regulatory frameworks.
As the legal proceedings against Malta unfold, the implications of this case will undoubtedly resonate throughout the EU.
The balance between national sovereignty and collective EU interests will remain a contentious battleground.
While the financial benefits of selling citizenship cannot be ignored, the potential risks associated with security, corruption, and the erosion of national identity are pressing issues that require careful consideration.
The future of golden passport schemes in the EU may ultimately hinge on how member states navigate these complex legal, ethical, and practical challenges.
As this debate continues, the integrity of the EU passport-and what it represents-hangs in the balance.
