Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1546283
ARTIFICIAL intelligence (AI) is not a distant promise. It is already changing how en- terprises operate. It can help enterprises analyse informa- tion, improve customer ser- vice, forecast demand, manage stock, strengthen cybersecurity and reduce repetitive adminis- trative work. For smaller enterprises, digi- tal transformation can under- standably appear complex. A family-run shop, a growing ser- vice provider or a small man- ufacturer may recognise the potential of new technology without knowing which solu- tion is suitable, how much it will cost or where support can be found. Our responsibility is to en- sure that all enterprises have the opportunity to modernise the operations, improve their productivity and compete more effectively. This is the purpose of the Digitalise Your SME scheme, co-financed through the Eu- ropean Regional Development Fund. With an allocation of €15 million, the scheme supports investment in digital solutions, intelligent systems and innova- tive technologies. Enterprises may receive up to €120,000 for eligible actions, while projects incorporating AI may qualify for an additional €100,000. These figures represent a considerable opportunity, but funding alone does not guaran- tee successful transformation. Before investing, an enter- prise must identify the prob- lem it wants to solve. It must also consider employee skills, data quality, cybersecurity and responsibilities under an evolving European regulatory framework. This is where Servizzi Ew- ropej f'Malta has an important role to play. This agency serves as the one-stop-shop for all EU-related matters. It assists enterprises to better under- stand EU funding opportuni- ties and turn an initial idea into a competitive project. Servizzi Ewropej f'Malta pro- vides free personalised guid- ance to enterprises of all sizes; from self-employed persons and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to large companies. Through one-to- one meetings, the agency's of- ficers support enterprises in identifying the most suitable funding schemes, developing stronger and more competi- tive applications, and, where required, facilitating commu- nication with relevant author- ities throughout project imple- mentation. This practical assistance is particularly valuable for self-employed persons, start- ups and SMEs that may have limited capacity or resources to navigate EU funding oppor- tunities. To further strengthen its outreach and ensure that en- terprises receive timely and relevant information, Servizzi Ewropej f'Malta works close- ly with other public entities and organisations that support enterprises across Malta and Gozo. Through cooperation agree- ments with entities such as Business First and the Family Business Office, Servizzi Ew- ropej f'Malta strengthens the link between enterprises and EU funding opportunities. These collaborations include delivering training and shar- ing information on EU funding programmes with officers from Business First and the Family Business office, enabling them to provide more informed sup- port to enterprises seeking to invest, innovate and grow. The closer cooperation also allows Servizzi Ewropej f'Malta to gain deeper insight into the challenges and priorities faced by enterprises. This is the model we must continue to strengthen and build upon. Enterprises ap- proaching government should encounter a connected support system rather than a series of separate doors. Our objective must be broader than helping companies purchase software. We must help them become more productive, resilient and competitive. I encourage Maltese and Gozitan enterprises to examine where digital tools and AI can make a meaningful difference and to seek guidance early. The opportunity is there. Our task is to turn it into sustaina- ble growth. 8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 23 AUGUST 2026 OPINION & LAW Man acquitted after court finds he was charged with the wrong offence THE Magistrates Court, sitting as a Court of Criminal Judicature and presided over by Magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech, ac- quitted a man accused of making a false statement after report- ing that he had found his vehicle damaged. The court found that while the evidence did point towards a crime having been committed, it was not the crime with which he had been charged. In the Police vs Tonio Aquilina, decided on 13 August 2026, Aq- uilina was charged under Article 188 of the Criminal Code with knowingly making a false declara- tion or giving false information in a document intended for a public authority in order to obtain an ad- vantage or benefit. The prosecution argued that Aquilina had falsely reported that he had found his vehicle damaged, when the evidence indicated that it was himself who had caused the damage. The magistrate addressed this point unequivocally, declaring: "There can never be any doubt that, in this case, the accused re- ported an offence which he was well aware had never occurred." Despite that finding, however, it was not enough to convict him. The difficulty lay not in whether the report was false, but in the of- fence which the prosecution had chosen to charge him with. The court held that the facts of the case did not fall within the param- eters of Article 188 of the Crimi- nal Code. Instead, it considered that the evidence pointed towards the offence contemplated under Article 110(2), which deals with the simulation of an offence. In explaining that distinction, the court referred to the Police vs Anthony Galea, decided on 9 July 2010, in which Magistrate Laurence Quintano examined the difference between material and ideological falsity. Material falsity concerns the genuineness of the document it- self—a fabricated document or an authentic document that is subse- quently altered. Ideological falsity, on the other hand, arises where the document itself is genuine but its contents are untrue. The distinction was encapsulat- ed in the well-known proposition that: "A forgery is a document which not only tells a lie, but tells a lie about itself." The point was that reducing a false statement to writing does not, by itself, necessarily trans- form it into the type of falsity contemplated by the offence with which Aquilina had been charged. By contrast, the court consid- ered that the conduct emerging from the evidence was more ap- propriately captured by Article 110(2). On that offence, the court referred specifically to the Court of Criminal Appeal judgment in the Police vs Anthony Farrugia, decided on 2 April 2004. In the Farrugia case, the court explained that the purpose be- hind the offence is to prevent the competent authorities from being misled into investigating a crime which never occurred, wasting police resources and potentially causing suspicion to fall upon in- nocent persons. That distinction proved decisive in Aquilina's case. The result was, on its face, some- what counter-intuitive. The court was not acquitting Aquilina be- cause it believed no false report had been made. Nor did it find that the evidence failed to show that he had reported an offence which never occurred. On the contrary, Magistrate Frendo Dimech expressly found that the evidence pointed towards Aquilina having reported an of- fence which he knew had never taken place. The problem was that he had not been charged under the correct article at law. Magistrate Frendo Dimech was sharply critical of the manner in which the charge had been for- mulated. She stated: "It is truly regrettable that charges are issued without the caution which criminal pro- ceedings require… Justice is not being served when accused per- sons are not charged with the of- fences which the evidence actually indicates they are guilty of." She described the situation as: "Nothing less than a blow to the valuable work of the Police Force, not to mention the proper admin- istration of justice." The charging error ultimately left the court with a straightfor- ward result—Aquilina's ac-quittal. JULIAN MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates Keith Azzopardi Tanti EU funding: supporting Maltese enterprises in their digital transformation Minister for European Funds, Social Dialogue and Consumer Protection