The Planning Authority's decision to approve the development of an apartment block near Ġgantija Temples is "scandalous," the Nationalist Party said.
The decision "offends our identity as a nation and neglects the public interest," PN spokesperson for cultural heritage Julie Zahra and planning spokesperson Stanley Zammit said in a statement.
On Thursday, the PA's Board voted seven to one in favour of developing a 22-apartment block and 20 basement garages 157 metres away from the Gozitan World Heritage Site.
The controversial decision came despite there being no Heritage Impact Assessment, something UNESCO asked for as the development site is within Ġgantija's buffer zone.
However, the applicant of PA/00570/21 argued that the development lies outside the buffer zone and is simply in an area of archaeological importance.
The Planning Board accepted the applicant's argument, but a Times of Malta fact-check showed that the development's location is within the buffer zone as it is demarked today.
Zahra and Zammit said: "Not only did the Planning Authority completely ignore UNESCO's request for a heritage impact assessment before the development was approved, according to guidelines of the World Heritage Committee, but also accepted the protection zone areas from before 1997, when the protection zone was extended".
The two PN MPs said the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage (SCH) was passive when faced with the PA's decision to ignore UNESCO.
PN call for Investigation into PA and SCH
The PN also called for an investigation into possible conflicts of interest within the PA and the SCH, because some employees are lent out from one entity to the other.
A parliamentary question by Zahra and answered by culture minister Owen Bonnici shows that Kurt Farrugia, currently CEO of SCH, is still an employee of the PA and has been loaned out to the cultural heritage watchdog.
The SCH is tasked with protecting cultural heritage. It often wades in on PA decisions, and its opinions carry weight.
Asked about their actions relating to this planning application, a spokesperson for the Superintendence said the SCH had already made their position clear before the sitting.
"Kindly note that the Superintendence has already made its positions on the development very clear, which comments are publicly accessible and may be found on e-apps," the spokesperson answered in a one-sentence reply.
The SCH was asked why it had not insisted on a Heritage Impact Assessment with the Planning Authority and did not withdraw its approval of the project after UNESCO asked for the assessment.
Immediate action should be taken to ensure the full enjoyment of cultural heritage sites, the PN said.
"Serious shortcomings in the planning process should be corrected, and the appeals process must be transparent and follow good governance practices".
Zahra and Zammit said the PN will continue to propose policies to safeguard cultural heritage sites and their surroundings.
The party also called on the PA and the SCH to prioritise the national interest.
"The PN insists on the PA and the SCH to have integrity, serious and transparent and prioritise the public interest and cultural heritage and every private interest," the statement said.
Greens condemn permit approval
ADPD said the approval of the permit "reinforces the notion that the PA is there simply as a rubber stamp, confirming the decisions taken by others and that, in reality, it has no authority".
It said "others" would have made planning decisions before the PA's board voted on applications.
"In reality, it (the PA) has no authority," the Green Party said in a statement.
Cultural heritage has no value for some who only care about monetary gains, ADPD said.
ADPD chair Sandra Gauci said that the members of the Planning Authority Board that voted in favour of the development should be dismissed and investigated.
"Their behaviour is ruining the buffer zone surrounding a world heritage site for the private and personal benefit of one person," Gauci said.