Erosion of National Sovereignty and Economic Innovation

Henley & Partners, a global investment migration firm, has vehemently criticized the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) ruling against Malta’s citizenship by investment program. The firm labels the decision as politically motivated, legally flawed, and an infringement on national sovereignty. They argue that the ECJ’s decision contradicts the Advocate General’s earlier opinion, which found the program compliant with EU law, suggesting political bias influenced the final judgment. The firm expresses concern that the ruling sets a dangerous precedent, empowering the EU to unduly interfere with member states’ sovereign right to grant citizenship, a competence explicitly reserved for individual nations under EU treaties. Henley & Partners raises concerns about the apparent targeting of smaller EU states, questioning whether larger nations like France or Germany would have faced similar scrutiny.

The firm challenges the narrative that citizenship by investment programs are merely commercial transactions, emphasizing the legitimate role such programs play in attracting vital capital and talent. They highlight the rigorous due diligence standards applied by Malta’s program, arguing that it contributes to national and regional development rather than undermining EU solidarity. They draw parallels with other countries like the U.S., Canada, the UAE, and Singapore, which actively utilize investment migration to stimulate economic growth, contrasting this with what they perceive as a regressive stance within Europe.

Henley & Partners advocates for a rational and evidence-based discussion on investment migration, cautioning against the potential negative economic repercussions of the ECJ’s ruling, particularly for smaller EU member states. They contend that Malta’s program is a responsible initiative aimed at nation-building, and urge the EU to prioritize improved regulatory oversight rather than encroaching on national sovereignty. The firm anticipates a surge in demand for their advisory services, as wealthy individuals seek alternative citizenship and residency options in response to increased EU restrictions.

Dr. Juerg Steffen, CEO of Henley & Partners, stresses the exclusive right of member states over citizenship matters, as enshrined in EU treaties. He warns that the ECJ’s decision could embolden the EU to overstep its boundaries and interfere with national competences, posing a threat to democratic governance within the Union. He further emphasizes that Malta’s program adheres to stringent due diligence protocols, contributing positively to both national and regional progress, contrary to the accusations of undermining EU solidarity.

Dr. Christian H. Kälin, Chairman of Henley & Partners, calls for a fact-based discourse on investment migration, expressing concerns about the potential adverse economic ramifications the ECJ’s decision could have on smaller EU member states. He underscores that Malta’s program is a carefully designed framework for nation-building, and should not be misconstrued as an opportunistic scheme. He urges the EU to focus on enhancing regulatory oversight instead of undermining national competences.

Despite the adverse ruling against Malta’s program, Henley & Partners anticipates a surge in demand for their advisory services, as high-net-worth individuals globally seek alternative citizenship and residency solutions in light of stricter EU regulations. The firm believes this situation underscores the increasing need for specialized legal guidance and diversified strategies for affluent individuals seeking global mobility. They conclude by stating that the ECJ’s decision doesn’t mark the end of investment migration, but rather the beginning of a new era characterized by more sophisticated cross-border mobility solutions.