During the past two years, I have had first-hand experience with the e-revolution brought about in the planning realm. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, our planning legislation was specifically amended so that the Planning Authority as well as the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal could regulate their own procedure with the possibility to  convene and conduct meetings using electronic or other viable means of communication. 

In the case of planning applications, an electronic platform was already in place through which all communication between the perit acting on behalf of his client and the PA is exchanged online.

Indeed, the last time I visited the PA in person was years ago. Not only that but the exchanged communication is, subject to GPDR rules, visible to all and sundry. This, of course, made it easier for third parties to interact in planning procedures, explaining the rise of third-party objections with regard to planning applications in recent years.

Even so, the ‘planning e-revolution’ went steps further. Insofar as the tribunal was concerned, the difficulties that arose with the filing of acts at the tribunal’s registry were addressed since they could also be done electronically. Acts include, of course, applications of appeal and replies thereto as well as the prescribed fees.

To play safe, a provision was included in the amended act so that the acts filed through electronic means are, for all intents and purposes of law, considered as the original. To keep everyone in track, a provision was also made to the effect that when an act is filed by electronic means outside registry opening hours such act shall be deemed to have been filed on the first following day of the opening of the said registry.

The number of timely decisions in the planning realm have reached a record high- Robert Musumeci

Moreover, a provision was made to the effect that, subject to a pre-notice of five days being given to all persons concerned, no nullity shall ensue for non-observance of any provision of the law relative to the conduct of the proceedings or the delivery of decisions of the tribunal by electronic or other viable means of communication due to the failure of the electronic or other means of communication used.

From where I stand, I do acknowledge that this provision might one day pose a constitutional issue. However so, it has, as yet, remained unchallenged.

When it comes to the furnishing of evidence, witnesses may also give their version of events following an oath which is equally administered on screen by the chairperson of the tribunal. The concerns that were initially raised insofar as the applicability and authenticity of the identity of the witnesses and evidence that is produced electronically also proved to be a non-issue.

The consequence to all this is that the number of timely decisions in the planning realm have reached a record high while periti and lawyers can better plan their schedule while keeping an eye on what is going live on screen. Meanwhile, it is safe to say that, once the pandemic is over, no practitioner in his right senses would want to revert back to the old days.

I see no reason why administrative law cases (typically handled by the Administrative Review Tribunal and, or judicial review of administrative acts monitored by the First Hall), cases handled by boards and tribunals (for example, the Rent Regulation Board or the Land Arbitration Board), property law cases handled by the Civil Court, appeals (where no new evidence is admitted) as well as sittings held before judicial assistants are not held online during unconventional hours (if need be) so that litigants need not access the courts during business hours.

What is needed, therefore, is that justice providers are enabled with internet facilities coupled with a strong system of e-filing and a statutory peremptory period within which parties are to close their submissions and the case is decided.  In that way, all the data of proceedings is stored in one place making information sharing much easier.

To me, this is the only solution to address the backlog of cases and step up the confidence in our judicial system. Thankfully, those who provide legal and or technical assistance are all equipped with basic infrastructure facilities and Malta has no problem with broadband connectivity.

Robert Musumeci is a lecturer in administrative law.