UHM files protest, calls move illegal

The Union Haddiema Maghqudin, on behalf of 115 Valletta hawkers, yesterday filed a judicial protest claiming that the government's decision to move them further down Merchants Street was illegal.

The UHM filed the protest, in the First Hall of the Civil Court, against the Prime Minister, the Minister of IT and Investment, the Minister of Competitiveness and Communication, the Parliamentary Secretary responsible for Small Businesses and the Self-employed, and the Police Commissioner.

The union outlined how, recently, the government had taken a decision to move the 115 hawkers from the area where they had been operating for the last 18 years, that is, Merchants Street.

The hawkers were ordered to move their stalls to a temporary area (St James' Ditch) before being permanently moved to an area further down in Merchant Street.

This decision, the union said, was taken despite ongoing discussions between the union and the government. The UHM noted that, in January 2000, the authorities had issued new regulations for hawkers and the parliamentary secretary had been quoted as saying that the regulations would ensure an organised market and better business in the area.

So, what had changed since 2000, the UHM asked, adding that the hawkers had a police and trade licence to operate. An architect's report showed that in the new proposed area in Merchants Street there was only space for 80 stalls to fit comfortably. This meant that, if the 115 hawkers were to fit, they would have to be crammed into tight spaces.

The report also showed that, whereas before there was 6.5 metres distance between stands, in the new allocated area the distance was reduced to 3.3m.

This was detrimental to the hawkers and would be of discomfort to shoppers, who would also be more exposed to pick pocketing. Not to mention that there was no space where police or the ambulance could intervene in case of an emergency.

The union added that the proposed site placed the hawkers away from the Valletta centre, where most of the business went on. The decision to move them was, therefore, detrimental to the quality of life of the hawkers and their families.

The union concluded by saying that the government's decision was administratively null as it did not result that there existed all the required permits for the proposal to be implemented.

The UHM gave the authorities a week to provide the hawkers with a remedy and held them liable in damages. Lawyer Ian Spiteri Bailey and Ingrid Bianco signed the writ.