Account of events leading to demolition

The Education and Culture Ministry yesterday issued a chronology of events to defend minister Louis Galea's role in the recent demolition of the façade of the 18th-century Villa de Fremaux in Zejtun, after Labour MP Evarist Bartolo called for his resignation.

Mr Bartolo said that by authorising the demolition, the minister had set an ugly precedent which would open the way for similar acts of vandalism on historic sites by "people in suits".

Saying the place was "a house, not a palace", the ministry went back to December 1990, when the then Planning Area Permits Board issued a permit for the villa's demolition, although this was objected to by the Museums Department.

A month later, most of the house had already been torn down and lost its architectural value, the ministry said. Police then intervened on behalf of the department.

In September 1992, the newly set up Antiquities Committee advised the minister of the time to accept the applicant's proposal to retain the façade but open up two entrances, one to a garage.

The following year, the Planning Authority's Development Control Commission confirmed the PAPB permit on condition that the façade be kept.

There were objections to the issue of this permit, but the PA, in 1998, approved a new application for garages and apartments to be built on site on condition that the Museums Department gave the go-ahead. The department's legal advice was that the demolition of the house in 1991 had not been illegal.

When Minister Galea was asked to give his advice on the matter according to law, the inside of the house had already given way to garages and apartments, with a large and dangerous entrance in the façade allowing access. Nevertheless, the minister recommended that every effort be made to restore what remained of the façade.

The developer disagreed, the ministry said, and asked the PA to reconsider the case. The minister was again asked for his formal opinion, and after taking into consideration the façade's state of semi-destruction and the fact that it was not situated in a village core, he decided he should no longer insist that it remain standing.

The Labour spokesmen were mistaken to say that the "building of historical and architectural value" had been torn down because of the minister's "personal views".

"Facts show that the Museum Department, while objecting to the development, did not have the legal power to stop the issue of the permits. This is why the new heritage-protection law provides for a majority of representatives from the heritage sector to sit on the new committee which considers building development," the ministry said.

"All this is confirmed by documents in the possession of the Labour Party, which can publish them whenever it wants to."