Wednesday, December 15, 2021


Here are the Guidelines published recently in Malta.  

They permit anyone convicted of a crime to have his or her conviction deleted from the
online system upon request, three years after the date of judgment. Read Paragraph 3.

This means that any compliance officer performing a due diligence inquiry upon an 
individual can no longer confirm the absence of a criminal history for a citizen or 
resident of Malta. This legislation violates the European Human Rights convention
 regarding the free availability of information. Malta has turned its back on Truth.

Malta will never be removed from the FATF Greylist if it continues to pass laws 
like this, to the contrary, it risks even more drastic penalties from regulatory authorities. 

(Taken verbatim from the government website)

1. Preliminaries

The right to a fair hearing requires that the judgments of the Courts be given in public.

Judgments of the Courts are accessible by law to the public in the Registry and in the Archives of the Courts.

The Legal Notice entitled 'Regulations on the Online Publication of Court Judgments (Data Protection) Provision of Functions' deals only with the publication of judgments on the website and with the in no way shall it prejudice the principle of publicity of judgments as protected by the Constitution and the law.

Judgments of all Civil and Criminal Courts will be published online on the website except for judgments of the Family Court or where there is a prohibition on publication which is out of law or which is ordered by the Court.

When the Chief Executive of the Court Services Agency receives a request for the removal of a judgment from the above-mentioned website for reasons of protection of the right to privacy and family life, they shall first the necessary checks shall be made to ascertain that the individual making the request is the subject of the Data identified or identifiable in the judgment and if so the request will continue to be assessed.

2. Criteria and Considerations

The criteria and considerations to be used in assessing whether the removal, in whole or in part, or the anonymisation of a judgment from the online system is justified are:

  1. The reason for the request, which must be explained by the applicant.
  2. Whether there is still a need for a judgment to remain on the website for reasons of public interest, the exercise of the right to information or the right to freedom of expression, or for research purposes historical or scientific.
  3. Whether the removal, in whole or in part, or the anonymisation of a judgment from the online system will have a negative impact on other individuals;
  4. The rules of the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679 in particular article 17 (right to erasure) of that regulation which also forms part of the law of Malta.
  5. Decisions of International Courts and in particular of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights with regard to the processing of personal data.

3. General Guidance - Balance between Rights and Obligations

As a general rule of thumb, the following requirements must be met before approving the removal, in whole or in part, or the anonymisation of a judgment from the online system:

  1. Three years have elapsed from the date of the judgment;
  2. If the offender has been sentenced to a fine, the fine must be paid;
  3. In the event that an appeal has been lodged from the judgment, the appeal must first be decided and the three years from the date of the judgment of the court in the degree of appeal must begin;
  4. In the event that the judgment is the subject of other proceedings those proceedings must be terminated;
  5. In the event of a conviction for a suspended prison sentence, the operative period must have elapsed;
  6. In the event that the person is found not guilty, the sentence shall, except on grounds of public interest, be revoked shortly after the request is made.

4. Notification of the Decision

The decision shall be communicated in writing to the person who made the request within 30 days of receipt of the request by the Chief Executive of the Court Services Agency.

5. Right of Appeal

The person making the request shall also be informed that with the right of appeal from the decision of the Chief Executive Officer of the Court Services Agency to the Commissioner for Information and Data Protection. in case the request is rejected.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.