Clandestine Mepa

The decision by the Constitutional Court that the independence of the Appeals Board from the Malta Environment and Planning Authority has yet to be demonstrated in our courts is a most welcome bolt out of the blue. Far too many people have suffered from outrageous Appeals Board decisions which, it was alleged, could not be contested in courts of law.

Registered objectors are most effectively muzzled during the sittings of the Appeals Board. They are only allowed, magnanimously, to watch in impotence and silence if Mepa decides not to uphold its own stop and enforcement notices but to shift its support in favour of the abusive developers.

We have been the victims of such a situation. Ostensibly, Mepa had confirmed our contention that a huge commercial garage next door to our home in a residential zone was abusive and Mepa had slapped stop and enforcement notices on it. For many years these never stopped anything and they were never seriously enforced.

Mepa's own Development Control Commission had actually decided that the garages could not benefit from the concession of extra large doorways which was permissible under the Development Control Policy and Design Guidance (2000), because the proposed development did not comply with that policy. As registered objectors, we were informed accordingly. This decision was also posted on the Mepa website for all to see. There was no appeal from that decision.

It is disgraceful that, at some subsequent stage, Mepa must have clandestinely reversed the decision of its own DCC, it neglected to inform us about this change, did not post it on its website and deliberately failed to reply to our letters. This effectively deprived us of any opportunity to make submissions. At subsequent sittings of the Appeals Board we were shattered to discover that the Mepa representatives were not making any attempt whatsoever to rebut the developer's claims or to defend the decision of Mepa's own Development Control Commission. The Mepa representative made it all too obvious that he was there to represent the interests of Mepa and not those of the registered objectors! Of course, we were not allowed to address the Appeals Board ourselves but our disgust at the sham procedure must have been all too evident!

What a shameful illustration of the independence and the impartiality of the Appeals Board and Mepa! What convincing proof that the whole set-up does not deserve the privilege of any immunity from enquiry in our courts of law!