OpenLobby.EU
Explore

The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

TDCGF

The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation works towards ensuring full justice for Daphne's assassination by using all legal means possible to ensure that the assassination investigation meets international standards.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Marie-Helene Boulanger (Head of Unit Justice and Consumers) and EBU-UER (European Broadcasting Union) and

22 May 2025 · Consultation of media representatives and associations in the context of the preparation of the upcoming European Democracy Shield (“focus group”).

Meeting with Fabio De Masi (Member of the European Parliament) and Transparency International Liaison Office to the European Union and Tax Justice Network

20 May 2025 · Preparatory meeting FISC mission to Abu Dhabi and Dubai

Meeting with Simona Constantin (Cabinet of Vice-President Věra Jourová) and European Federation of Journalists and

16 May 2024 · anti-SLAPP

Response to EU rules on fighting against corruption

17 Feb 2023

We endorse TI EUs feedback: 1) Remark concerning the legal basis The chosen legal basis for EU action in the field of the fight against corruption is Art. 83 of the TFEU, which concerns criminal matters. While corruption should indeed be treated as a serious crime, accompanied by appropriate sanctions, we would like to highlight that only Art. 83 TFEU as a legal basis can be very limiting. Hence, we propose a dual legal basis, Art. 83 & 114 TFEU on the establishment of the internal market, as combatting fraud and corruption pose serious criminal, economic and financial threats, & must be combatted holistically across different policy areas. 2) TI priorities in the upcoming EU initiative on strengthening the fight against corruption Legislative & operational barriers As a legislative matter, Member States need to create a level playing field when it comes to criminalising embezzlement, illicit enrichment, influence trading, abuse of functions, obstruction of justice, revolving doors, and illicit party financing, as well as corresponding sanctions. Since enablers play decisive roles in grand corruption schemes, criminalising activities that aid or abet corruption also need to become a top priority. Furthermore, we propose to enlarge the scope of corruption offences and make illicit enrichment a new and well-defined crime under any new instrument. To ensure the right level of prioritisation and a good understanding of risks, law enforcement agencies (LEAs) and judicial authorities must have adequate capacities to fight corruption decisively. This includes increased financial and human resources, training, and expertise of staff, including for high-ranking officials such as ministers or prosecutors. To take out the profit from corruption, it is imperative that authorities have adequate resources to seize and confiscate all proceeds and instrumentalities of corruption, not only those related to organised crime. A reversed burden of proof shall hereby increase the effectiveness of confiscations related to illicit enrichment cases. In absence of such a provision, the effectiveness of confiscation measures could be hampered by allegations of perpetrators that the property targeted by competent authorities for confiscation does not result from illicit activity. Prevention efforts A serious attempt must be made by the EU to target the enablers that allow criminals and kleptocrats to thrive, by clearly defining what qualifies as enabler of corruption and sanctions for them. The EU must make it financially and reputationally unattractive to service criminals and kleptocrats across Member States. Financial and asset declarations shall be put in place in all Member States for high-ranking officials, MPs, and other PEPs, and shall also include relevant information on their immediate family members. After the verification of the data, declarations shall be included in an anti-corruption data base and shall be publicly available in a machine-readable format. Furthermore, authorities should enhance coordination, cooperation, and information exchange among the various authorities tackling corruption, organised crime, and money laundering. A regular exchange of information must occur between law enforcement, FIUs, asset recovery offices, and anti-corruption agencies as well as coordination and cooperation with authorities in other EU Member States and third countries. For the effective prevention of corruption, Member States shall put in place specific services on ethics and integrity. In order for public administration staff to identify and report threats effectively, they should have access to specific trainings, services, and points of advice, including high-ranking officials. Lastly, dedicated anti-corruption measures must surely not be viewed in isolation. A successful anti-corruption framework must treat all corruption-related offences independently of organised crime and not merely as a facilitating or compounding factor.
Read full response

Meeting with Ramona Strugariu (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur for opinion) and Transparency International Liaison Office to the European Union and

26 Jan 2023 · Anti-SLAPP Directive

Meeting with Marie Frenay (Cabinet of Vice-President Věra Jourová) and European Federation of Journalists and

8 Sept 2022 · European Media Freedom Act

Meeting with Daniel Braun (Cabinet of Vice-President Věra Jourová)

6 Jul 2022 · Media freedom

Response to 8th Amendment to Annex II to Directive 2000/53/EC on end-of life vehicles

21 Jun 2022

The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation is participating in this public consultation on the Open Data Directive, with respect to the high value dataset on Companies and Company Ownership, as we believe that open company data is a vital tool in the fight against financial crime. The draft Implementing Regulation leaves out much of the most important data in identifying the abuse of legal persons, such as the names of companies’ legal owners, legal representatives, and beneficial owners. This would render the dataset ineffective: CSOs and journalists would not have access to the data they need to investigate corruption, and SMEs would not be able to carry out proper due diligence on potential partners. Conversely, those who have the resources to pay for this data are able to obtain it in most EU Member States, while others, namely journalists, who need access to company ownership documents in bulk as part of their work often struggle to shoulder the costs. We believe that in countries which do provide full access to this data for free, it has only been beneficial in protecting the public interest. We hereby call on the Commission to act on the promise of the Open Data Directive and to include in the Implementing Regulation a requirement to allow access to the following data free of charge: Name of the company Company status Founding date Cessation date (if applicable) Historical names Registered Address(es) Legal form Identifiers (registration or company number / VAT number/phone number/ email) Data from VIES Member State where registered Activity Code using the NACE code Number of employees Turnover Capital Detailed information on branches All changes (to individual companies & list of companies dissolved) with date of last update Name(s) of company legal representative(s) Name of company's directors Names and details of authorised legal representatives with appointment and termination dates All changes and date of the last update Legal entities Accounting documents, including consolidated financial statements, non-financial statements, management reports, transfer prices reports, and other reports Detailed data on branches Intra-group transactions Date of the last update Other company documents provided to the authority Name of the legal owners and beneficial owners Share (percentage) of ownership, and nature and extent of Beneficial Interest held (in shareholding and/or voting rights) as well as legal ownership Start (and end date) of the beneficial owner relationship Month and Year of birth Nationality Country of residence Owner identifier Names of shareholders Country of residence of the shareholders/owners Capital links between companies All changes and date of the last update Type of insolvency proceeding Time limit for lodging claims Date of closing insolvency proceedings The court where proceedings is to be lodged All changes and date of the last update We also call for: Requirements to move towards the digital filing of documents permitting company documents to be available in machine readable and eventually in fully open formats, by maximum 2030 Online databases to be searchable by selection of any or all fields with results viewable online or exportable in bulk as open data Access to information pertaining to companies that have been struck off in a way which allows remote queries, for example by creating a separate database to be made available to journalists Bilateral meetings between national Journalists’ Associations and local Business Registries to identify solutions to the barriers to access which journalists face. Business Registries to host clear policy statements on their websites, explaining their choices regarding searchability and fees. These action points are in part drawn from a national stakeholder conference on beneficial ownership transparency which the Foundation organised in Malta on the 15th June 2022 with representatives from regulatory authorities, financial services and the media.
Read full response

Meeting with Věra Jourová (Vice-President) and Greenpeace European Unit and

28 Apr 2022 · SLAPP

Meeting with Didier Reynders (Commissioner) and

3 May 2021 · Rule of Law in Malta