Migrants who live in a converted hostel raided by the police two weeks ago would be worst off if the health authorities were to close the premises down, a lawyer argued in court on Monday.

Some 120 migrants living at the former Paloma Hostel in Buġibba were evicted by the police in the dawn raid on August 26, but were then allowed to return after a court temporarily upheld a request for an injuction requested by the landlords.

The health authorities want the place shut down because it does not meet health standards.

The future of the migrants living in the building will be decided on Tuesday, as the court is expected to rule on whether to uphold an injunction filed by the property owners.  

If the court turns down the request, then the building will be officially closed off and the occupants evicted.

Migrants living in the property have said that if this were to happen they would likely end up homeless.   

When the court started considering the case on its merits on Monday, lawyer Edward Gatt said the migrants were most likely to be the hardest hit if the premises were to be shut down.

He described the police raid as a “PR exercise” and a “Fantozziata” (a farce of the kind produced by Italian character Fantozzi) that had “terrorised” the residents, who were rudely awakened by police officers as they smashed down doors.

The migrants were ordered out and bundled away in police buses for questioning, only to release many of them a couple of hours later.

“It was no coincidence that this raid took place on the same day that a boatload of migrants was brought ashore,” Dr Gatt said.

He argued that the authorities should have done the decent thing by ordering the landlord to effect the changes they saw necessary to the premises, without however sealing off the property and “putting chains at the doors.”

And the police could have knocked on the doors during their raid, rather than knocking them down.

Action caused more distress

He stressed that the “draconian measure” taken by the while possibly popular with the public, was likely to cause most suffering to the 120 migrants, including children, who would end up homeless if the premises were shut down.

No one had offered them alternative accommodation.

There had been much ado about the squalor faced by the migrants living inside the rundown premises, Dr Gatt said, adding that “with all due respect, this has become a national problem, with many people nowadays living in squalor”.

While conceding that certain works were needed at the premises, the situation was not such as to warrant the closure of the place, said Dr Gatt.

Moreover, his client was likely to suffer greater prejudice if the injunction was not upheld and the place was shut down.

“A person who makes a living out of such letting would starve to death by the time he has his rights confirmed by the courts,” Dr Gatt argued.

He presented an architect’s report regarding works already carried out after the raid to improve the accommodation.

Lawyers Dustin Camilleri and Alexia Farrugia Zrinzo, appearing for the health authorities, countered that the Superintendent of Public Health had the legal authority to take action, including the closure of premises, in case of a public health emergency, as was this case.

There was a risk to health not merely to the occupants of the premises but also to the community at large, Dr Camilleri argued. This emergency was the crux of the whole issue.

Mr Justice Francesco Depasquale put off the case to Tuesday for a decision on the confirmation or otherwise of the injunction.