As pressure continues to build on the European Commission to withdraw potential funding for the contentious Melita TransGas pipeline connecting Malta and Sicily, concerns regarding corruption, murder links, and environmental impact are being raised. A petition led by NGOs is anticipated to reach Brussels, urging action against the project.

The proposed pipeline, estimated at €400 million, has attracted significant scrutiny due to its association with Electrogas, the Delimara Power Plant operator, whose ultimate beneficial owner, Yorgen Fenech, is currently awaiting trial for alleged involvement in the assassination of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia. Further investigations have pointed to corruption and money laundering among other stakeholders related to the power plant and deals concerning Azerbaijani gas.

While the Maltese government has suggested the pipeline could support environmentally friendly hydrogen power in the future, concerns persist about its feasibility and the project's alignment with international climate goals.

Despite the Trans-European Networks for Energy (TEN-E) guidelines promoting renewable energy and electricity interconnections, Malta obtained an exemption, securing the project's inclusion in the 5th EU list of Projects of Common Interest (PCI) in 2022, potentially making it eligible for EU funding.

In addition to highlighting Fenech's potential financial gains from the project, the petition urges key decision-makers to champion a fossil-free future and ensure that no public funds, whether national or EU funding, support the Melita TransGas pipeline project.

While the possibility of the project appearing on the sixth PCI list remains uncertain, EU officials emphasized that any funding allocation would necessitate a rigorous evaluation process, including an assessment of the project's associates and potential involvement in fraudulent or criminal activities.

The controversial Electrogas deal, facilitated by former Maltese officials, has been the subject of intense scrutiny, with concerns raised about irregularities in the bidding process, pricing discrepancies, and alleged payments to offshore entities.

Furthermore, EU budget protection mechanisms, including oversight from the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and other international organizations, serve as additional safeguards against potential misappropriation of funds or fraudulent activities.