Baħrija architect again under attack

Galea. L

Jun 30th 2009, 09:27

Why should architects be allowed to make ODZ applications?
Any such applications should be thrown out straight away.
Architects should be penalized for every such application and after a number of application no application whatsoever must be accepted from them.
Why should they not respect our laws?

Stephen Borg Cardona

Jun 30th 2009, 00:30

A person involved in politics should lead by example, sadly i do not think that this is happening . Dr Scerri too should give the good example , however it seems it has not occurred to him as yet. Possibly Dr Gonzi could suggest it.

nigel fenech

Jun 29th 2009, 17:10

I am no fan of Professor Musumeci, however, acting for and on behalf of the best interest of a client is one of the most ethical manners needed in a profession. Some say that beyond planning and legal norms which Prof Musumeci uses to defend his clients, he must be more sensitive ecc....Does this mean that a lawyer should not defend his client in a murder case or badly stlll, in a drugs case....both cases are morally wrong on the part of the offender, who is innocent before proved guilty. With his applications and levels of success I find it very difficult to say that he is ethically incorrect as in his career as architect I am sure he would be pinned down for any unetical or misdoing behaviours....Next time a usrs needs a good lawyer to defend him,do not go for the estabilshed.....it is the same reasoning....

J Martinelli

Jun 29th 2009, 15:58

Architects and MEPA should be at arms length to each other. When an application is presented to MEPA, all contacts between the two parties should cease immediately and only MEPA should be authorized to contact the architect should additional information be required which will help MEPA reach a decision. Any attempt by the architect to push / speed up / influence MEPA for a favourable decision with regard to an application should render the application null and void and immediately returned forfeiting any application fee.

Applications for projects which infringe on ODZs unless replacing a pre-existing structure on the same footprint which originally had legally infringed on an ODZ prior to existing laws, should automatically be rejected without recourse.

Ownership of the land in question is immaterial because the application is based on the status of the land, not the status of the owner.

Seychell Michael

Jun 29th 2009, 14:56

Architect Musumeci could be legally right in stating that he must work hard in the interest of his clients even if this means that he wins cases in ODZ on 'points of law' . As many said this is what happens in the Law Courts all over the world not only in civil/commercial cases but also in criminal cases.

However professional persons should keep in mind that apart from being legally right in whatever they do they have a duty to ensure that their action/s is also morally and ethically right, as stated by the NGO's and as I have stated in a previous comment on this same case.

After all this is the same duty that all workers from the sweeper to the manager must adopt in their work places.

Joseph V. Grech

Jun 29th 2009, 14:39

Mr. Musumeci writes a weekly article for one of our Sunday newspapers - usually concerning cases that have appeared before the Planning Appeals Board. He first explains the case then, (If memory serves me right) he gives the decision taken by the Planning Appeals Board and follows up with his own personal / professional opinion on the decision reached.
I honestly believe that this arrangement may be open to abuse in the sense that it is not recommended that a practising architect should (possibly) influence the members of the Planning Appeals Board one way or another. I am NOT saying that Mr. Musumeci is abusing mind you - but I do believe that this practice should be discontinued for there might well be a conflict of interest at stake. Having an architect commenting about the workings of the Planning Appeals Board is not recommended.
The last article concerned a number of judgements reached by the Courts. Readers are urged to read that - ostensibly when the Courts have cases involving Mepa they refer to past judgements. This is done so that no citizen may be denied rights that might have been accorded to others. I find that rather strange....

Charles Sammut

Jun 29th 2009, 13:34

@ Pierre Micallef

Haven't all magistrates and judges been practising lawyers before their appointment the same way that you say all MEPA board members are architects.

There is an inherent flaw in the system, but is there an alternative. Some cases are not straightforward open and shut. One could argue that the same applies to the democratic system. It is open to grave abuses, but is there a better alternative?

Joseph E Briffa

Jun 29th 2009, 13:21

The likes of architects who file applications for development in ODZ should hide themselves in shame. They should know that this is against government policy which laid down that henceforth there will not be any more development in ODZ. It's useless for one to argue that there have been similar developments in the past. Two wrongs don't make a right. I believe the PM has gone on record saying that only in excepional cases will development be allowed in ODZ. So why do some architects persist in filing such applications? Maybe it's the 'professional' fees that tempt. them to persists in their deplorable behaviour.. Do they feel they are making money in an honest way simply because there are applicants who are prepared to fork out the fees? By the same token drug pushers should not be prosecuted as they push drugs because there is a market for drugs and prostitutes should not be prosecuted as there is a market for sex. Don't such architects have a conscience? Shouldn't the Chamber of Architects take steps to rid itself of these characters? Should these cowboys be allowed to persist in their behaviour? Shouldn't they be struck off the register?

Pierre Micallef

Jun 29th 2009, 12:35

It’s easy to understand why Mr.Sammut likens Musumeci to a lawyer (and the planning process to a court trial) – the architect does this himself when he implies that his successful applications derive from his arguing harder, better in favour of his clients. But this is exactly what’s wrong with the current MEPA – the board is not being called upon to decide an applciant’s ‘guilt’ but merely whether an application conforms to established policy or not. The process should be as simple as asking “is this within an ODZ? If yes, then reject…” and should not rely on the persuasive skill of the architect-cum-lawyer in arguing.

One compelling reason to reject this analogy is the fact that several of the board members (i.e. the ‘judges’) have often been architects defending applications themselves – now how would that work out if the process truly did resemble a court procedure?

Charles Sammut

Jun 29th 2009, 11:41

While I do not agree with the proposed development at Bahrija, one can hardly blame Mr Musumeci for working in his clients' interests.

Isn't that what lawyers do in criminal cases? How many criminals have been acquitted on technicalities? That's the system.

Anthony Slater

Jun 29th 2009, 11:05

"......it must be pointed out that defending applications till the very end is precisely what my profession entails."

Your profession, Mr Robert Musumeci, should have a code of ethics that protects sensitive ecology.

How on earth do you sleep at night knowing that applications you are involved in are ruining the country for everyone? Ask yourself, is it really worth it?