Green NGOs slam practice of referring cases to appeal as dishonest

Authorities criticised for promoting the custom of referring cases to appeal after an abusive permit is issued;

The roposed TownSqaure development in Sliema
The roposed TownSqaure development in Sliema

Various NGOs and other parties have slammed the authorities for promoting the custom of referring cases to appeal after an abusive permit is issued, saying this is “nothing but a dishonest way to exhaust objectors and avoid doing the right thing”.

The court decided not to uphold the injunctions requested by Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar, Qui si-Sana and Tigne Residents’ Association, Friends of the Earth Malta, along with several residents, in the case of the TownSquare project in Sliema, and Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar, Din l-Art Helwa, Friends of the Earth and Dr Marlene Farrugia, in the case of the Mriehel towers.

The case has been re-directed to the Planning Authority (PA) board’s jurisdiction, and if necessary to the Appeals Tribunal.

In a statement issued Monday, the NGOs and organisations noted that the court had stated that the missing studies that were legally required by the Floor Area Ratio (tall buildings) Policy could be requested and provided at the PA hearing.

“The PA’s claim that the studies were indeed intended to be investigated in the hearing whose suspension the plaintiffs requested, did not satisfy the law as the eNGOs and other plaintiffs maintain that it is not acceptable to present outdated 2007 studies that fail to include the cumulative impact of developments built since then,” the statement said.

Furthermore, it read, presenting studies at the hearing, as was claimed, violated the Aarhus Convention and the relevant EU Directive, which states: “The public participation procedures shall include reasonable time-frames for the different phases, allowing sufficient time for informing the public and for the public to prepare and participate effectively during the environmental decision-making.”

The eNGOs and organisations said the court did not examine whether the Mriehel site was only added to the FAR (tall buildings) policy after the public consultation had closed.

Still, the court confirmed that the eNGOs had proven their interest through their work to increase awareness on environment and planning issues such as the proposed Mriehel towers which will invariably have an economic, public health, traffic, and environmental impact.

The statement said that the the plaintiffs look forward to the publication of independent, updated and accurate studies, undertaken by impartial and professional companies, well before the PA’s hearing on these projects.