Author
The Reception Regulations state that reception conditions may be withdrawn or reduced where the asylum-seekers abandon their established place of residence without providing information or consent or where they do not comply with reporting duties, request to provide information, or to appear for personal interviews concerning the asylum procedure, and finally when an applicant has concealed financial resources and has therefore unduly benefited from material reception conditions.[1]
The Regulations state that such decisions shall be taken “individually, objectively and impartially and reasons shall be given” with due consideration to the principle of proportionality.
The decision to reduce or withdraw material receptions conditions is taken by AWAS or DS, if the applicant is detained. asylum-seeker
According to AWAS, if a resident has not signed at the ‘designated’ open centre for 3 weeks, their place is reclaimed at the centre.[2] Cases of termination when failing to comply with rules are very rare and implemented in extreme cases. AWAS indicated that less than 5 persons were evicted in 2020 for such reason. AWAS indicated that there were no decisions reducing or withdrawing reception conditions during 2021.
Asylum-seekers may appeal these decisions before the Immigration Appeals Board, in accordance with the Receptions Regulations and the Immigration Act.[3] However, this remedy is considered to be inaccessible in practice due to the lack of information and the extremely stringent deadlines to file the appeal: 3 days. This was highlighted by the ECtHR several cases against Malta.[4]
According to AWAS, during 2023 the total number of decisions reducing or withdrawing reception conditions was solely attributed to the end of contracts. There were no instances where conditions were withdrawn or reduced other than this ground.
Evictions
Single men are allowed to remain in the reception centres for no more than six months, while families benefit from a one-year contract. AWAS indicated that is it working closely with the communities to find alternative accommodation for applicants.
Residents receive a written reminder to leave, six weeks before the end of their contract. AWAS indicated that the list of people evicted is always reviewed by social workers and the psychosocial team.
People are entitled to challenge that eviction with AWAS, and the decision is internally reviewed by a care team and management, although no guidelines or documents on this procedure are publicly available. According to NGOs, AWAS might reconsider such decisions on a case-by-case basis depending on the vulnerability of the applicant.[5]
Families are requested to leave after a year and upon assessment and if needed they can receive financial assistance for the first three more months. According to the Ministry, their contract with AWAS could also be extended.[6]
Upon arrival, applicants are briefed about the reception rules and the length of their stay in the reception centre. They are also made to sign an Agreement with AWAS covering their stay.
Nevertheless, such evictions remain a major problem in Malta where accommodation is very hard to secure due to high prices in a largely unregulated private rental market, and due to the fact that landlords are usually extremely reluctant to rent accommodation to asylum-seekers. Thus, these evictions often result in homelessness.[7] This continued in 2021, 2022 And 2023. However, there have been cases where AWAS have extended contracts of those who were identified as vulnerable in some way. This includes homelessness as a vulnerability.
According to official data published by the Social Affairs Ministry, homelessness further increased in 2023 with non-Maltese nationals particularly affected by the problem. The data shows that, in the first six months of 2023 the social welfare agency APPOĠĠ handled 667 cases of homelessness, of which 369 were non-Maltese nationals[8].
Moreover, due to the delays in processing asylum applications, individuals are usually evicted while they are still considered applicants for international protection holding only a three-month renewable asylum-seeker document. This makes it difficult for them to find employment and accommodation, with the monthly €130.48 (covering 28 days) allowance not being sufficient to find a place to rent. The introduction of the new policy restricting access to the labour market for asylum-seekers hailing from countries listed as safe has caused new difficulties for asylum-seekers whose contracts in the open centres end but are not allowed to find regular employment before they have been in the country for 9 months.
In 2020, authorities constantly and publicly stated that Malta had no more capacity to welcome migrants. The Foreign Affairs Minister stated in May 2020 that “centres are full and we have no place for more migrants”. However, it was pointed out by NGOs on several occasions that Malta failed to build the expected new centre mainly funded by the EU.[9] To date, the new centre has not yet been built and it remains unclear what has happened to the EU funds that had been allocated to this project.
According to information provided by AWAS in early 2024, at the end of 2023 the Agency was accommodating the following number of persons:
| Centre | Capacity | Residents |
| Dar il-Liedna | 56 | 18 |
| Ħal Far Open Centre (families) | 128 | 45 |
| Hangar Open Centre (single women and families) | 532 | 13 |
| Ħal Far Tent Village (single men) | 1232 | 114 |
| Initial Reception Centre (Marsa) | 251 | 21 |
| TOTAL | 2,199 | 211 |
Essentially, throughout 2023 Malta’s open centres were virtually empty with a residency of a mere 10% of available capacity. This was mainly due to the extremely low number of arrivals, as explained above, related to Malta’s harsh policy on preventing access to the territory. Contrary to what would be expected in such a situation, 2023 did not see the Government increasing investment in community-based schemes or integration measures.
Both aditus and JRS indicated that, for 2023, they did not file appeals against withdrawal or reduction of reception conditions, due to lack of capacity and the decision to prioritise more pressing concerns.[10]
[1] Regulation 13 of the Reception Regulations, Subsidiary Legislation 420.06 of the Laws of Malta.
[2] Information provided by AWAS, January 2021.
[3] Regulation 16(1) of the Reception Regulations, Subsidiary Legislation 420.06 of the Laws of Malta, taken in conjunction with Article 25A(7) of the Immigration Act, Chapter 217 of the Laws of Malta.
[4] ECtHR, Louled Massoud v. Malta, Application No 24340/08, Judgment of 27 July 2010; Aden Ahmed v. Malta, Application No 55352/12, Judgment of 23 July 2013; Suso Musa v. Malta, Application No 42337/12, Judgment of 23 July 2013.
[5] Information provided by Home Affairs Ministry in January 2024.
[6] Information provided by Home Affairs Ministry in January 2024.
[7] Times of Malta, ‘Migrants end up homeless as centres overflow’, 2 July 2020, available at: https://bit.ly/3tDzPkS.
[8] Newsbook, Social cases double between 2012 and 2022, 12 March 2024, available at: https://tinyurl.com/343sa8hm.
[9] The Shift, ‘Malta risks losing €5 million EU funds for “unbuilt” migrant centre, PM to detain migrants offshore’, 4 September 2020, available at: https://bit.ly/3vOpIf4.
[10] Information provided by JRS Malta in June 2024.