Police close investigation, but questions remain over the Electoral Commission’s complaint

6 Jul 2026 - Home | Maritime and Aviation | News | Politics | Sections

The Malta Police Force has officially closed its investigation into the General Workers’ Union (GWU) Secretary of the Transport, Maritime and Aviation Section and confirmed that no further action will be taken against him.

The GWU has welcomed this outcome, as it confirms exactly what the Union maintained from the very beginning: that a trade union secretary who updates members on the status of their collective agreement negotiations commits no criminal offence. This is a legitimate function protected by law.

The Police had a duty to investigate once they received a formal report, and the GWU has never argued otherwise. The investigation has now run its course and has been closed without any criminal action being taken.

However, the case continues to raise important questions that remain unanswered. The Electoral Commission, chaired by Mr Joseph Camilleri, chose not to address the substantive questions put to it by IT-TORĊA regarding the criminal complaint it filed against the GWU’s Transport, Maritime and Aviation Section Secretary.

These questions remain relevant regardless of the outcome of the police investigation. They concern the proportionality of the action taken, legal certainty, the scope of the electoral silence provisions and, above all, whether trade union officials can carry out their duties without fear when responding to members seeking clarification about their employment conditions and collective bargaining negotiations.

IT-TORĊA asked the Electoral Commission whether it considers the provisions governing the electoral silence period to apply to internal communications between a union secretary and union members concerning ongoing collective agreement negotiations. It also asked whether criminal proceedings against a trade union official for such communication constitute a proportionate response, and whether such action could discourage other union officials from communicating with their members on employment-related matters during future electoral periods.

These questions extend well beyond an individual case. They go to the heart of workers’ right to seek information from their union regarding their employment conditions, and to the right of trade unions to carry out their representative functions without fear that internal, non-political communications could result in criminal proceedings.

GWU Secretary General Kevin Camilleri said that a union secretary’s first duty is to the members he represents.

“When workers seek clarification about their own collective agreement, a union secretary has a duty to respond. This is not a breach of any law; it is the most basic and fundamental role of a trade union.”

He added that the GWU will never accept a situation in which one of its officials is exposed to criminal proceedings simply for carrying out his duties towards union members. The Union will continue to defend its officials and, where necessary, raise such matters before the appropriate international bodies responsible for safeguarding trade union freedoms.

The GWU wishes to make it clear that its concerns are not directed at the Police, who had a legal duty to investigate once a formal complaint had been filed. Rather, its concerns relate to the complaint itself and to the precedent it could have created had trade union communication concerning collective bargaining been treated as a criminal matter within the context of an electoral period.

The GWU believes that, in a democratic society, internal communications relating to employment conditions and collective bargaining cannot be regarded as political activity. A union secretary who informs members about matters affecting their employment is not engaging in political campaigning; he is carrying out his responsibilities as a trade union representative.

The GWU therefore reiterates its call on the Electoral Commission and the competent authorities to provide legal clarity on this matter. It is essential that every trade union official can perform their duties without uncertainty or fear that legitimate communication with union members could expose them to criminal proceedings. Such clarity is necessary to ensure that situations of this nature are not repeated in the future.