Baħrija project: Musumeci denies exerting pressure
The excavated site at Bahrija.
The architect behind the controversial development in Baħrija has "categorically" denied putting any pressure on the planning authority.
"As if! I'm not crazy," Robert Musumeci told The Times, insisting that the case did not affect his professional integrity as an architect because it was his job to defend planning applications.
He said he had never put any pressure on the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, not even in this case, which revolves around a permit to rebuild a farmhouse in Baħrija belonging to the former president of the Nationalist Party, Victor Scerri.
Dr Scerri resigned as PN president last Tuesday, shortly after it emerged that the planning authority's auditor, Joe Falzon, had finalised a damning report in which he concluded that the permit had been issued illegally.
In fact, the authority has now said it would be revoking the permit.
This would be the second permit for a development represented by Mr Musumeci that was being revoked. Last year, the authority similarly blocked a four-storey apartment block close to Lija's picturesque Belvedere after first approving it.
Mr Musumeci, who is also PN's Siġġiewi mayor, insisted that none of this reflected badly on his integrity as an architect. He argued it was his duty to pursue the application of a client, much like a lawyer defending a client against prosecution in court.
Most of all, he denied putting any pressure on anyone, which the auditor's report hinted at.
"I did not even speak to the case officer about it," Mr Musumeci said.
He said it was normal for negative recommendations by the planning officers (as was the case four times with the Baħrija farmhouse) to be overturned. He said any overturned recommendation would be criticised but this was a democratic process and, "God forbid", that a recommendation should be made final without giving the applicant the chance to make his counter proposals in the same way that lawyers defended people who were being prosecuted.
"It would be very unhealthy and undemocratic to be suspicious of any overturned recommendation," he said, adding that his counterproposals were public and he had defended the case on a technical level but did not make the final decision.
He said he had no doubt that Dr Scerri's political position had a bearing on this case.
Asked what he thought about the revocation of the permit, Mr Musumeci said he would be reacting during an upcoming public hearing. "I will make my reaction in the public hearing. I do not want to compromise my presentation," he said, adding that he would be giving his views about the whole process.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
14 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
reno calleja
Jul 27th 2009, 21:07
isma bil-fors emmen jekk trid
reno calleja
Galea. L
Jul 27th 2009, 18:06
J Martinelli
YOU ARE WRONG AS USUAL MARTINELLI in your puerile attempts to defend your Gonzi government.
In areas such as Bahrija only repairs to existing structures can be made and not the building of VILLAS. Another application to simply make a small alteration to a window 200 metres away was NOT approved Martinelli.
Come and enjoy our Nirvana and then maybe your comments will not continue to be taken with more than a pinch of salt.
C Galea
All regulations were disregarded when the permit was being considered. How many applications were made and approved by the same architect in such zones?
C Calleja
"As long as ODZ applications are not prohibited by law, architects will continue to present such applications."
This only means an INCOMPETENT government.
Joseph Schembri
Jul 27th 2009, 17:50
If a person who commits a serious crime is not convicted the blame cannot be put on the defense lawyer but on the prosecution for not doing its job well enough. Similarly in this case the blame (if blame there is) does not lie with the architect but with the people whose duty it was to see that this development not take place.
If I were to apply for any development I'd want an architect like Mr. Musumeci - to protect my interests and not some one who just charges me hundreds of euros for only a signature.
J Martinelli
Jul 27th 2009, 14:29
@ Stephen Vella et al
...because even in an ODZ one is permitted to reconstruct an existing structure, such as in Dr. Scerri's case.
Dr. Scerri's latest application and approval by MEPA included an extension to the original footprint and perhaps the extension should not have been approved.
There were similar cases right at the same zone where other 'villas' were constructed. If MEPA revokes Dr. Scerri's permit to build, what will they do with similar cases where the structures have been in place for several years? Are they not also a detriment to the environment in this 'pristine' valley? Will MEPA and FAA demand that they too, must be removed? Is the real issue here who owns the land and who the landowner hires as his architect?
C Galea
Jul 27th 2009, 13:35
I can't understand why perit Musumeci is at fault. He has done his job and obtained a permit at his client's commission. And it took him 8 years and 4 applications to reach that goal. And he succeeded. Whether MEPA was right or wrong to issue the permit(s) is another argument about which the auditor has already commented. I do not see why the matter should reflect negatively on the architect.
r ferriggi
Jul 27th 2009, 13:28
let us see if this logic makes sense:
i love the environment. i speak out in favor of the environment. i am a member of a big political party. i am an architect.
i apply on a clients' behalf ( not your normal client,,,,) to build a villa in the middle of a pristine valley. the environmentalists and people of goodwill all think it should not be done.
there is a good chance that damage has already been done. but the law allows me to submit such permits. they made a mistake and approved it.
i therefore have no fault or qualms of any kind about this. i and my client are completely innocent. THEY MADE the mistake of approving it!!!!
nice way out eh?!?!
Charles J. Buttigieg
Jul 27th 2009, 12:57
@ Joe Mangion
MEPA was the sinner, Perit Mesumeci was the architect, were these people acting to protect our environment as they are in duty bound to do? Tell us, Sur Mangion, who was going to be the main beneficiary of all this mess? Finally the fact that Dr. Scerri resigned from his post of PN President only tantamount that the main beneficiary is now an Ex PN President instead of the incumbent. It’s six of one half a dozen of the other.
Joe Mangion
Jul 27th 2009, 11:25
@ Stephen Vella
Because its not illegal to submit such a applications.
I don't blame Musumeci or Scerri, i blame MEPA for approving the application.
On the other hand i suggest that the MEPA reform would ban all odz applications. If not, architects and land owners will continue submit odz applications
Stephen Vella
Jul 27th 2009, 11:11
If the area is an ODZ, why did Mr Musumeci submitted the application in the first place?
C Calleja
Jul 27th 2009, 10:11
Its' Musumeci's job to present applications.
As long as ODZ applications are not prohibited by law, architects will continue to present such applications.
It is MEPA that must shoulder responsibility for this scandal. After all it was MEPA that approved the application.
On the other hand some political responsibility must be shouldered by G Pullicino. (at that time responsible from this monstrous authority.)
Joseph E Briffa
Jul 27th 2009, 09:51
Where is the integrity of an architect who does not advise his/her client that an application runs counter to declared government polcy and should NOT be submitted for approval in the first place? An architect of integrity will just refuse to be involved in such an application. Where is the integrity of an architect who is party to such applications? The analogy of the lawyer does not hold water: a lawyer defends his/her client to ensure that he gets a fair trial and tries to mitigate circumstances by putting doubts in the minds of the jury on whether his client has actually committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt. The architect on the other hand is a party to the client's insistence to make mockery of the law and break all the rules. The two examples are not comparable. In the case of the architect he/she could be aiding and abetting his client in the commission of an act that goes against the laws of the land: this is not the case in the services of a defence lawyer. One doesn't need to be in possession of two Ph.Ds to appreciate the difference.
Anthony Cardona
Jul 27th 2009, 09:44
Hmmm… it feels like a déjà vu… maybe some are not not crazy but others are not gullible either.
M.Triganza
Jul 27th 2009, 09:43
Mr.Musumeci as a professional architect should have never presented the application for the building of a farmhouse in that area. He should well know the rules and regulations of a building permit. Alla jbierek kulhadd jilghaba tal-qaddisin wara li jkunu ghafguha!!
mariella caruana
Jul 27th 2009, 09:33
Once may be a coincidence, but now it looks that its a trend and that has a lot of implications. I believe it makes more sense to defend the environment rather than the individual.