Recommendation not implemented: Failure to facilitate return of Maltese mother and child from Russia

Recommendation not implemented: Failure to facilitate return of Maltese mother and child from Russia

Published October 16, 2026

The complaint

The Parliamentary Ombudsman investigated a complaint concerning the difficulties faced by a Maltese citizen living in Russia in obtaining the necessary documentation to return to Malta with her minor son, who is also a Maltese citizen.

The complainant sought assistance from the Maltese Embassy in Moscow after her son’s Maltese passport had expired. She explained that returning to Malta was urgent both because her son wished to see his father and because they were residing in Rostov on Don, relatively close to the active conflict zone in Ukraine.

The Embassy informed her that her son’s passport could not be renewed without the written consent of the child’s father. The parents were separated and going through divorce proceedings, and the father refused to provide the required consent.

Facts and Findings

Given the circumstances and the fact that both mother and child were Maltese citizens, the Office of the Ombudsman contacted the Maltese Embassy in Moscow, Identità and the complainant in an effort to identify a solution.

The Ombudsman’s Office also contacted the father, who initially agreed to provide his consent. However, when subsequently contacted by Identità, he refused to sign the application for the renewal of his son’s passport.

Identità then consulted the Immigration Police and proposed an alternative arrangement whereby the mother and child could travel to Malta through Istanbul using their existing passports. According to the investigation, the Immigration Police confirmed that Maltese citizens in similar circumstances had been facilitated in returning to Malta through particular airlines, with entry ultimately falling within the competence of the Immigration Police. The Maltese Embassy, however, declined to support this proposed solution.

The Ombudsman emphasised that Maltese citizens have a constitutional right to enter Malta. Article 44(1) of the Constitution protects the freedom of movement of Maltese citizens, including the right to enter Malta, while Article 3(2) of Protocol No. 4 to the European Convention on Human Rights provides that no person may be deprived of the right to enter the territory of the State of which that person is a national.

The Ministry maintained that the established procedure for issuing passports or emergency travel documents to minors required the consent of both parents, unless a court order provided otherwise. It also argued that travelling internationally with an expired passport and without the consent of both parents could present difficulties, particularly in a case involving a minor, and maintained that the advice given had been based on the child’s best interests and safety.

The Ombudsman did not dispute the general requirement for parental consent. However, he considered that the particular circumstances required the State authorities to assist in finding a practical and lawful way for two Maltese citizens to return home. In particular, once Identità and the Immigration Police had proposed an alternative route, the Embassy should have assisted rather than impeded that solution.

The Ombudsman subsequently reiterated that the issue was not simply whether the Ministry itself had the authority to permit or deny entry into Malta, but whether it had fulfilled its broader responsibility to provide clear, consistent and effective assistance to Maltese nationals seeking to return. He considered that institutional boundaries should not result in the practical and financial consequences of conflicting advice being borne by the complainant and her minor son.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The Ombudsman sustained the complaint.

He concluded that the course of action taken by the Maltese Embassy was wrong and that the complainant and her son had not been adequately protected by the State in their efforts to return to Malta.

The Ombudsman also acknowledged and commended the efforts made by Identità and the Immigration Police to find a practical solution.

He recommended that the Ministry for Foreign Affairs reimburse the complainant for the expenses incurred in obtaining the necessary Russian documentation and the airfares to Malta, upon presentation of the relevant receipts to the Maltese Embassy in Moscow.

Outcome

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs rejected the conclusions and recommendation of the Final Opinion. It maintained that it had acted in good faith and in accordance with established procedures, and that it had provided what it considered to be the safest and most appropriate advice in the circumstances.

The Ombudsman maintained his position. On 5 June 2026, he informed the Ministry that there were no valid grounds to revise or depart from the recommendation and requested concrete steps towards its implementation by 30 June 2026.

As the Ministry continued to reject the findings and recommendation, on 15 July 2026 the Ombudsman referred the matter to the Prime Minister in terms of Article 22(4) of the Ombudsman Act.

No response was received from the Prime Minister. Consequently, on 18 September 2026, the Ombudsman transmitted the Final Opinion and supporting documentation to the Speaker of the House of Representatives for consideration by Parliament in terms of Article 22(4) of the Ombudsman Act.