Environmental NGOs contesting a secretive deal which handed management of the Aħrax and Miżieb woodlands to hunting group FKNK have been denied legal standing by an administrative tribunal.
The ruling, which NGOs say they intend to appeal, means the activists are unable to contest the Lands Authority decision to sign away the two Mellieħa woodland areas to the hunting federation.
In a statement issued on Saturday, the NGOs said that the Tribunal for Administrative Review had decided that they did not qualify as “aggrieved persons” under the law as they had not been “notified of the decision” by the Lands Authority.
They said that the decision, if allowed to stand, could mean that no third parties would be able to contest decisions by the authority at the tribunal.
The NGOs said they would be filing an appeal against the decision with the court of appeal and said they remained optimistic.
A map of the Aħrax woodland indicates how area is divided under the terms of the FKNK deal.“NGOs have had success in overcoming questions of legal standing in the past and remain hopeful that the woodlands will eventually be returned to the public for the enjoyment of all,” they said.
The statement was signed by the Ramblers’ Association, Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar, Friends of the Earth Malta, Moviment Graffitti, Din L-Art Ħelwa and Birdlife Malta.
Hunters’ lobby FKNK was given management control of the Miżieb and Aħrax woodlands last October for three years against an annual token payment of €200 for each site.
The deal outraged environmentalists and civil society groups, who noted that the public would be denied access to the green areas for more than five months of the year, when hunting seasons are open.
The FKNK has insisted that the deal formalised an informal arrangement that had been in place for decades and argued that nothing has changed.
NGOs had given notice that they intended to contest the deal in court, arguing in legal filings that the Lands Authority had acted in an "arbitrary, intransparent, discriminatory and unreasonable manner" and that it had committed "numerous procedural violations" resulting in it acting outside its powers as established by law.