NGOs lose bid to halt development zone changes

Mr Justice Tonio Mallia yesterday dismissed an application filed by four environmental organisations for the issue of a warrant of prohibitory injunction against the Malta Environment and Planning Authority over the planned development zone extensions.

A Mepa spokesman confirmed that the court accepted the development planning watchdog's argument and dismissed the application filed by Flimkien Ghal Ambjent Ahjar (Together For A Better Environment), the Biological Conservation Research Foundation, Friends of the Earth (Malta) and the Ramblers' Association.

The NGOs last week asked the First Hall of the Civil Court to stop Mepa from processing, in any way, any submissions made as a result of Mepa's release of maps indicating how local plans would be modified.

They said the maps showed the manner in which the local plans for Malta and Gozo would change and indicated the land that would now be developable on the basis of a memorandum sent to Mepa by the Cabinet of ministers.

Land that would be developable at the express request of the government also featured on the maps, the NGOs said.

The court was also asked to stop Mepa from communicating to the government any conclusions it might have reached on the matter.

The laws regulating planning did not envisage a situation whereby the minister responsible for planning or indeed the Cabinet could impose changes to the local plans, as was the case with the Cabinet's memo, the four organisations argued.

All the law provided for were proposals by the Cabinet. It was only in situations where Mepa disagreed with such suggestions and publicly stated its position on planning that the minister could present the government's position on development.

In this case the proceedings had not reached such a stage.

The NGOs claimed that the Cabinet's memo was ultra vires its powers in terms of the planning law and that the criteria set by the Cabinet were contrary to the Structure Plan and were not based upon any scientific criteria.

Mepa, they added, had seriously failed in its duties when it accepted to publish plans that amended the local plans on the basis of the Cabinet memo. It ought to have referred the memo to the Appeals Board, they argued.

If the Cabinet memo were adopted, it would lead to irreversible damage to the countryside, which the four NGOs said they were pledged to protect.

But Mepa submitted that its board had approved the draft partial revision of the Structure Plan before it was served with the NGOs' application. It said a warrant of prohibitory injunction could only be issued in order to safeguard rights the NGOs would have to prove they had. None of the NGOs had produced any evidence of such rights.

In any event, the NGOs had not suffered any irremedial prejudice, for the revised Structure Plan that had to be approved by Mepa had first to be submitted to the minister responsible for the environment and, eventually, to the House of Representatives for approval.

Mepa insisted it was processing the submissions made in full accordance with the law, and that there was no need for it to refer the issue to its Appeals Board.

The court was therefore requested to dismiss the NGOs' application.

Lawyer Joseph Ellis was counsel to the NGOs and lawyer Ian Stafrace represented Mepa.