Landlords forced to provide social justice

We are hearing a lot about the rent reform and justice for both the tenant and landlord. Unfortunately so far in the discussions, the scales of justice are considerably out of balance in favour of the tenant. We see and hear about high value properties being rented for ridiculously low sums of rent. The proposed €185 annually is not even enough to cover a month's rent today.

The original Rent Law came into force in 1919 to support and protect those who found themselves in a desperate situation after the war. Unfortunately, we hear about lots of cases of individuals abusing this law: tenants who earn good wages and who are well able to afford to rent at today's rates; tenants who own properties which they rent for post-1995 rents; tenants who demand large sums of money or property to vacate premises. These individuals do not qualify for assistance from the government so why does the government force private landlords to subsidise these individuals?

If individuals do require assistance, why are private landlords forced to provide it? Social justice implies that these ones are aided by the community as a whole, usually through government assistance. It can hardly be called social justice when it comes down to an individual landlord having to provide that assistance. So what about the rights of the landlord?

The European Convention on Human Rights in protocol 1, article 1 states: "Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law".

Does this apply? Yes it does. The government has already lost three cases (cases 17647/04, 35349/05, 31122/05) concerning the rent laws in the Court of European Human Rights.

In fact, in passing judgment in these cases, the court considered that "Malta had to set up remedial procedures to balance the interests of the landlords, including their entitlement to derive profit from their property, and those of the community, including the availability of sufficient accommodation for the less well-off." Is €185 per annum profit? Hardly, when structural repairs are concerned. Keep in mind that €70,000 in the bank at three per cent interest will return €2,100 per annum, considerably more than a paltry €185. Is it justice for the tenants' beneficiary to take precedence over the owners' beneficiaries. A contract is an agreement between two or more people. How can parties not involved in the agreement or contract (perhaps not even being born) have rights to that agreement or contract?

For real social justice, the tenant must be means tested with the same criteria that the government uses.

If the individual fails the means test, then post-1995 rent law should be applied. If someone is in need, then for it to be truly social justice the government must provide the assistance required, otherwise it is no longer social justice but individual "justice" - the individual of course being the unfortunate landlord.