From an eyesore to a nightmare

The Malta Environment and Planning Authority is in the news again. The additional two floors built over a Valletta building spanning between Strait Street and Old Bakery Street – intended to house the Family Court complete with judicial chambers – has not gone down well with many observers: the vertical extension is being described as an eyesore that sticks out like a sore thumb in the Valletta skyline. There is no doubt that the building merits this description.

Mepa pretends it is infallible, omniscient and omnipotent and the government wants us to believe that the reform in the authority has made it even more infallible- Michael Falzon

What I find incredible is the statement attributed to the Environment Ministry in The Times (January 26) pointing out that the relevant permit was issued in 2007, that is, before the Mepa reform which led to an increase in “sensitivity towards the importance of protecting the environment and historic heritage”.

I think this is pure balderdash and will continue to think so until anyone explains to me how and why this same permit cannot be issued under the current planning regime resulting from the new Mepa legislation.

Mepa pretends it is infallible, omniscient and omnipotent, even though it is run by human beings, and the government wants us to believe that the reform in the authority has made it even more infallible, omniscient and omnipotent than it ever was.

The truth is that this was, prima facie, a human error of judgment and no legislation can eliminate such errors. But the truth is sometimes the last thing many want to believe. Imagine if this was a permit issued to a private citizen: Mepa would find it impossible to shake off allegations of corruption.

Even if one excludes the ‘C’ word, one cannot exclude the suspicion that the permit was issued after undue pressure from someone or other. I thought deeply about this, so deeply that I fell into a reverie and imagined the logical sequence of this suspicion.

The Prime Minister would ask the Commissioner of Police to investigate how this permit was issued for the benefit of the Ministry of Justice. (Luckily the police force is no longer under the aegis of the Ministry of Justice and we should, indeed, thank Heaven for small mercies).

Now that the country is in election mode, the Police Commissioner would pass the buck to two very good investigators who, coincidentally, are avid but covert Labour Party supporters – not an impossibility, as this is a typical Maltese oxymoron.

These investigators would then proceed to arrest the members of the Development Control Commission who approved the permit against the recommendation of the Mepa case officer, keep them in a cell for almost all the statutory 48 hours, and verbally abuse them until they admit that someone phoned them up and asked them to ensure the permit was issued.

From there the case would go to court with their being accused of succumbing to undue pressure. In the event that they are not found guilty, the Attorney General (from the Ministry of Justice!) would appeal and insist on a conviction.

Thankfully this was just a reverie, even though it turned out to be a nightmare in which the powers that be were chasing and prosecuting the powers that be.

I woke up from my dream in earnest, safe in the knowledge that the issue was being ‘discussed’ with Mepa in order to ‘identify solutions’.

I am sure many wonder how I am so critical of Mepa when I was the minister who set up the Planning Authority (PA) in the first place. People even accuse me of having created a monster. The PA was set up as the 1987 Fenech Adami administration wanted to ensure a sound physical planning regime based on technical justifications and good administrative behaviour replacing arbitrary ministerial discretion in an area where abuse had become rife.

Among other things, the PA had to respect the right of permit applicants to a fair hearing, according to two principles of natural justice: no one judges himself (nemo judex in causa sua) and both sides of the argument are heard (audi et alteram partem).

Mepa boards deciding on the outcome of permit applications were to meet in public and to take reasonable decisions in the light of the circumstances of each case, in the quickest time possible; while ensuring procedural equality between the parties to the proceedings who would in this way be given an opportunity to present their case without being placed at any disadvantage.

Moreover, the procedure also ensured that all parties have access to all relevant documents and information and that these are made public. As any administrative tribunal is obliged to do, Mepa had to indicate, with sufficient clarity, the grounds on which it bases its decisions.

At the end of the day, I knew – and said so publicly – that humans were going to run Mepa and therefore it was subject to all the frailties and weaknesses of humanity.

Infallibility, omnipotence and omniscience were never part of the equation. Nor was callous disregard to the common citizen.

Mepa’s arbitrarily assuming these characteristics has distorted what should have been a daily exercise in democracy – to my chagrin, of course.

micfal@maltanet.net