Interest in Malta's revised citizenship-by-merit system has been 'stronger than expected,' two lawyers tell MaltaInvest.mt.

Seven months after Malta replaced its controversial citizenship-by-investment scheme with a merit-based model, legal practitioners say the picture is becoming clearer – though the system is still evolving in practice.

When the reforms were first announced, the shift raised fundamental questions about how “exceptional contribution” would be interpreted, how applications would be assessed, and whether the sector itself could survive without a transactional investment element. Conversations held at the time with lawyers Malcolm Mifsud and Veronique Dalli reflected cautious optimism mixed with legal uncertainty.

Now, seven months on, things are clearer and interest is high.

Dr Kris Scicluna, who specialises in litigation, commercial law, insolvency, and complex corporate disputes, says that clients appear encouraged by the clearer framework and by the possibility of demonstrating meaningful impact rather than simply fulfilling financial requirements. He argues that many applicants view the merit-based system positively because it aligns citizenship with tangible contribution.

Dr Mifsud also confirms that his firm continues to receive enquiries, even without active marketing. However, he stresses that the new framework should not be promoted in the same way as the previous investment-based model, describing it as fundamentally different in nature.

A recurring theme in both conversations is the increasing importance of the Community Malta Agency in shaping the practical application of the law.

The Lawyers say the Agency’s willingness to issue memos, guidelines and structured procedures has helped stabilise the system during its early stages. The introduction of an initial expression-of-interest structure, where the Agency can indicate whether a project or contribution aligns with the programme’s objectives, is also seen as helping practitioners manage expectations.

Still, both acknowledge that the framework is likely to continue evolving as more cases are processed and precedent gradually develops.