Malta’s Foreign Affairs Ministry Explains Why It Supported An EU Clause To Allow Spying Of Journalists
Malta’s Foreign Affairs Ministry has explained why it supported the proposal of a clause in the European Media Freedom Act that would give governments the right to use spyware against journalists in the name of national security.
“The recent discussion on this Act is regarding the application of this prohibition when there are overriding (founded and in accordance with National Laws of Member States) National Security Concerns – for example, in relation to potential terror attacks,” the Minister for Foreign Affairs Ian Borg’s spokesperson told Lovin Malta.
The European Media Freedom Act is aimed at protecting journalists and media institutions, including by prohibiting state surveillance of journalists, their families, and employees. However, Malta lobbied for the inclusion of a clause that would authorise the surveillance of journalists in the EU in the name of national security.
This was the initial clause: “This Article is without prejudice to the Member States’ responsibility for safeguarding national security.” It’s essentially saying that when a member state decides that its national security is threatened, the government is authorised to surveil public watchdogs.
And this garnered widespread criticism from NGOs, public watchdogs, and MEPs alike stating that the clause was too vague – creating leeway for governments to spy on jounalists in “undefined circumstances”.
However, Zerafa ensured that such a clause, which has now been negotiated and agreed but yet to be formally approved, would work according to national law.
“The Maltese government unequivocally supports the principles outlined in the Proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Media Freedom Act. This includes a prohibition against the use of spyware and intrusive surveillance software concerning journalists and their sources.”
“It is imperative to note that this Proposal is still subject to inter-institutional negotiations and that the Council had agreed on a common position in June of 2023, on the basis of work undertaken by the Swedish Presidency.”
“The Spanish Presidency is currently engaged in negotiations with the European Parliament to try to find a compromise and broker an agreement between the two institutions (Council and Parliament). The next trialogue was envisaged for 15th December 2023 and Ambassadors will be debriefed on 20th December. In this regard, a compromise draft of article 4 was and Malta had no objections or reservations.”
“The Government is supportive of the proposed Regulation and its objective of strengthening media freedom and pluralism in all Member States. Further developments in this regard are expected in the next hours and days, and Government will continue to engage constructively in discussions with a view to reaching an agreement on the file as soon as possible, with a view to ensure the protection of journalists and journalistic sources,” he concluded.
Last week, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission hammered out a compromise deal on the European Media Freedom Act.
On X, Metsola announced that an agreement on the act had been reached.
According to the newly amended act, member states could monitor journalists, as long as they are abiding by national or EU law, are authorised by a judicial or independent and impartial authority, and are “justified on a case-by-case basis by an overriding reason of public interest and is proportionate.”
The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) expressed approval of the amended act, hailing it as a victory for everyone advocating for press freedom and democratic values.
The political agreement reached is now subject to formal approval by the EP and the Council. Once officially adopted and published in the Official Journal of the European Union, the Regulation will be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States after 15 months.
Do you agree with this compromise?