ADPD – The Green Party has called for the immediate abolition of a directive requiring educators to seek government permission before speaking publicly on educational matters, describing it as colonial-era censorship fundamentally at odds with democratic principles.
Why This Matters:
• Teachers currently need approval from the Ministry of Education before making any public statements or media appearances
• The Ombudsman has ruled the blanket restriction violates freedom of expression and is unreasonable in a modern democracy
• ADPD's education platform proposes smaller schools, cooperative learning models, and curriculum reform alongside teacher empowerment
The criticism centres on Directive DG DES 28/2024, which extends civil service media restrictions to teachers, academics, and school heads. The directive compels educators to reflect ministry policy when speaking publicly and requires prior approval for media engagement—a practice the Office of the Ombudsman has already condemned as unlawful.
The "Media Gag" Debate
Sandra Gauci, ADPD Chairperson and educator, argues the restriction contradicts the very principles Malta's schools claim to promote. "If children and young people are to be raised as critical thinkers, educators cannot be restricted in sharing their own critical thoughts," she stated during the party's education policy presentation.
The directive references a 2011 policy governing political participation and media communication across the entire public service. While civil servants traditionally require permission for media engagement, extending this framework to teachers has proven controversial. The Ombudsman's ruling specifically noted that such blanket restrictions are not reasonably necessary in a democratic society and infringe on constitutionally protected freedoms.
Despite the ruling, Malta's Ministry of Education has maintained the policy, a stance ADPD describes as characteristic of a government uncomfortable with criticism. Mario Mallia, educator and party official, emphasized that genuine respect for teachers extends beyond salary negotiations to include trust and professional autonomy.
Broader Education Reform Proposals
The teacher freedom issue forms part of ADPD's comprehensive education platform for 2026, which envisions a fundamental restructuring of Malta's education system. The proposals, presented by Gauci and Mallia, aim to create an inclusive system fostering community rather than competitive individualism.
School structure and autonomy feature prominently in the platform. ADPD advocates for reducing school sizes to ensure students don't feel anonymous within massive institutions. The party proposes granting state schools—at minimum the college level—authority to select their own staff, similar to the independence church and independent schools enjoy. This would allow institutions to develop distinct educational philosophies rather than implementing a one-size-fits-all approach dictated centrally.
The curriculum proposals challenge Malta's traditional exam-focused model. ADPD calls for a system prioritizing cooperation over competition, with school days restructured around fewer but longer lessons to facilitate deeper engagement and collaborative teaching methods. School-based assessments would be refined to avoid becoming "glorified exams" that replicate rather than replace traditional testing pressures.
Structural Accountability Changes
ADPD proposes transferring responsibility for MATSEC and curriculum development directly to the Ministry of Education from the University of Malta. This administrative shift would centralize educational governance while paradoxically decentralizing pedagogical authority—placing testing and curriculum standards under ministerial oversight while giving individual schools greater operational freedom.
The party sharply criticizes the current practice of making crucial education decisions behind closed doors. They advocate for systematic consultation with educators, students, and parents before policy implementation—a process they argue is currently absent from Malta's education governance.
What This Means for Malta's Education Sector
The proposals would fundamentally alter Malta's education landscape if implemented. Learning support educators would receive formal recognition commensurate with their contribution. Childcare would be reconceptualized as early education requiring trained professionals rather than primarily an economic support service for working parents.
ADPD also addresses Malta's demographic transformation, calling on church schools to accept more immigrant children. The party argues that a more equitable distribution of migrant students across all school types would promote interaction among diverse backgrounds, rather than concentrating these students in state schools.
Private tuition subsidies would be revised to emphasize quality over quantity, with early education granted the same institutional status as primary and secondary levels—a recognition currently lacking in Malta's educational hierarchy.
European Context and Malta's Position
Malta's education system is transitioning from a traditionally rigid, exam-driven model toward greater flexibility. The National Curriculum Framework adopted in 2012 and the Learning Outcomes Framework phased in from 2018 represent policy shifts toward student-centred pedagogy and skills-based learning. Primary teachers now have some embedded flexibility to allocate instructional time according to student needs, and a 2023 circular specifically encouraged emergent rather than prescriptive curricula in early years.
Yet Malta's approach to teacher autonomy remains significantly more restrictive than systems in Finland, where educators with master's degrees enjoy extensive professional freedom to design local curricula and assessment strategies. Even Germany, with state-level curriculum standards, allows teachers considerable flexibility in selecting content and methods. Malta's directive requiring media approval places it closer to France's highly centralized model, where teachers function essentially as civil servants with limited professional agency.
The tension between Malta's evolving curriculum flexibility and its persistent restrictions on teacher speech creates an institutional contradiction. Schools encourage inquiry-based learning and critical thinking among students while simultaneously muzzling the educators responsible for fostering those capacities.
The Path Forward
ADPD frames teacher empowerment and freedom of expression as fundamental prerequisites for developing critical thinking in students. The party's education policy emphasizes "the capability for voice" as a foundational principle—the real opportunity and freedom for individuals to express themselves without institutional barriers.
Whether Malta's education establishment will embrace these proposals remains uncertain. The Ministry's continued enforcement of the speech directive despite the Ombudsman's criticism suggests institutional resistance to relinquishing control. Yet the contradiction between Malta's stated educational values and its treatment of educators grows increasingly difficult to ignore as the country positions itself as a forward-thinking hub for international education and digital innovation.
For Malta's 9,000-plus teachers, the question is straightforward: can an education system genuinely promote critical thinking while requiring those who teach it to seek permission before exercising it themselves?
