Updated | Opposition slams new cohabitation law for revoking couples' rights

Updated at 7:17pm with comments from Justice Minister Edward Zammit Lewis

A new cohabitation law denies rights obtained by thousands of families three years ago, when Parliament approved legislation currently in force, Mario de Marco said. 

The Nationalist MP said the new Bill put forward by the government - which is currently in its second reading in Parliament - only recognises the contractual form of cohabitation, denying almost 4,000 families in a de facto relationship the rights obtained three years ago.

The cohabitation law currently in force recognises three forms of cohabitation: the de facto cohabitation for people who have been living together but never formalised that relationship; cohabitation by unilateral declaration where one of the parties formalises that relationship; and the contractual cohabitation where the couple formalise their relationship in front of a notary.

However, notaries had deemed the law to be unworkable and refused to advise clients or register cohabitations.

Incoming Equality Minister Edward Zammit Lewis solved the impasse by presenting a new law that will completely replace existing legislation. The new law will only recognise cohabitation that is contracted at law.

During Monday’s parliamentary debate on the new law, de Marco criticised the government’s decision to deny couples the rights they obtained three years ago.

“Rather than try and solve the problems flagged with the law, the government opted to eliminate two forms of cohabitation… there are approximately 4,000 families who live in a de facto relationship and these will be stricken off as if they do not exist,” de Marco said.

He noted that in the past three years there were only 13 couples who formally registered their cohabitation – the type government wanted to keep.

Calling the proposed new law "muddled", de Marco said the Bill would also reduce contractual cohabitation rights by removing the existing right for that person within the couple who cares for any minors to receive financial help from their partner, both during the cohabitation period or in the case of a separation. The MP noted that such financial help was considered separate from child maintenance under the existing law.

He was also critical of the fact that, under the new law, in the case of one of the cohabiting partners dying, the surviving party would only be entitled to continue living in the same home for a year. Under the current law, the surviving partner can continue living in the home for the same period of time that they were cohabiting with their partner, or for a maximum of 15 years.

“This is probably the first time in this parliament’s history when a minister, supposedly pushing equality, is denying civil rights to thousands of Maltese couples rather than giving them more rights,” de Marco said.

He also questioned what will happen to the rights gained by couples in a de facto relationship as a result of existing legislation. “Zammit Lewis’s new law will simply negate their rights, as if they never existed.”

Justice Minister reaction

In a reaction to de Marco's criticism, Zammit Lewis called the PN MP out for having never been involved in addressing the cohabitation situation and finalising a law in the area while his party was in government.

"De Marco called the law 'muddled'. I can't say he made a muddled law because when he was [a minister] he didn't make any such cohabitation law."

Zammit Lewis insisted that he had consulted with the Chamber of Advocates and Notarial Chamber in drawing up the Bill, after it had been brought to his attention that the current law was not workable. "I'm here to draw up a solution," he said.

The minister also emphasised that he was committed to finding a solution for the couples currently in a de facto cohabitation relationship.

Zammit Lewis added that he had already communicated with PN MP and equality spokesperson Claudette Buttigieg on her concerns about the Bill, and that we would be pursuing further discussions in this regard.