Advert

‘It is an injustice, pure and simple’

Louena Aquilina and her family feel their land in Marsa was expropriated by the government on false pretences. Photo: Darrin Zammit Lupi

Louena Aquilina and her family feel their land in Marsa was expropriated by the government on false pretences. Photo: Darrin Zammit Lupi

A family is livid at the government for taking “agricultural land” away from them, only to then incorporate it in a proposed sports village.

We’re not going to sit by and watch as others make a little fortune from land that’s ours

The expropriation took place just a week before the area’s local plans were modified by the planning authority.

The Camenzulis are now locked in a legal battle with the government over the expropriation of 5,000 square metres of their land in Marsa.

Marked as a road in the area’s 2006 local plan, the land was accordingly valued at €75,000 by the government. The week after the expropriation notice was issued, the Malta Environment and Planning Authority granted permission for the land to be turned into an integral part of the proposed Marsa Sports Village.

The government said it wanted to give the land to the private sector to build a hotel, restaurants and gambling facilities as part of the sports village project.

“According to the expropriation notice, the land is needed for public use. But the government took the land away while valuing it as agricultural land, only to get it approved for development just a week later. Now they want to hand it over to someone to use it as part of his private business. Is that fair?” asked entrepreneur Louena Aquilina.

She felt it was “odd” that the government had been confident enough of obtaining planning permission to go ahead with the expropriation.

“The Mepa board is independent. What made the government so sure it would be granted permission?”

Mrs Aquilina is the daughter of one of the land’s titled owners, David Camenzuli, who insisted that the expropriation had been underhand from the start.

“Nobody told us. We only found out about the expropriation when the man owning the neighbouring land came to tell us about a planning notice he had come across,” said Mr Camenzuli.

According to a spokesman at the Land Ministry, expropriations are listed in the Government Gazette, the media and the local council where the land is located.

Mrs Aquilina insisted there was no such notification at Marsa local council. “I went there specifically to check and there was nothing. Had we not been told by our neighbour, we’d have never known and missed the appeal deadline date. And I suspect that’s what they were hoping would happen.”

A ministry spokesman said there was nothing odd about the one-week period between the land being expropriated and development permits being issued.

Requests to expropriate land had to be submitted to the Government Property Division at the same time as planning permit applications were filed.

“It is up to the government entity doing the project to obtain the permits. It is not the Government Property Division’s responsibility to see whether the necessary permits were obtained.”

A Mepa spokesman confirmed that reviews to the local plan in question were published and opened to public consultation in October 2011.

The revisions were subsequently endorsed the following January, when the Camenzulis’ land was expropriated.

A spokesman for the Sports Parliamentary Secretary also defended the decision to expropriate this area, saying this was always done carefully and only in the public interest.

He admitted that the government intended involving a third party to develop the land, adding that this would generate new jobs and benefit the sports community and the public.

Mrs Aquilina remains unimpressed by this defence.

“Why should someone be allowed to build a hotel and restaurant on my land?”

A court case concerning the expropriation is ongoing and a determined Mrs Aquilina said the family would petition the European Court of Human Rights if the domestic courts found for the government.

“It is an injustice, pure and simple. We’re not going to sit by and watch as others make a little fortune from land that’s ours,” she promised.

Advert

58 Comments

Post comment

Please see our new Comments Policy

Comments are submitted under the express understanding and condition that the editor may, and is authorised to, disclose any/all of the above personal information to any person or entity requesting the information for the purposes of legal action on grounds that such person or entity is aggrieved by any comment so submitted.

At this time your comment will not be displayed immediately upon posting. Please allow some time for your comment to be moderated before it is displayed.

For more details please see our Comments Policy

Your User Profile is incomplete.
Please click here to complete your profile before posting comments.

GL Calleja

Jul 26th 2012, 18:14

These things happen under the PL and under the PN. Same piece of cloth different dresses. I am still waiting for my property in B'Kara which was requisitioned, (confiscated) by the government in 1974. How about it Minister?

GL Calleja

Jul 26th 2012, 18:08

" What happened to the 'public purpose' which allows land to be expropriated? " D Vella I am sure you will be thrilled if the government were to come over and expropriated your house or your land if you own any of these. I am sure you wouldn't object because it would be in the public interest. Get real. Don't be so free with somebody else's property and or possessions. Many times than not " Public purpose" is used to steal property from their owners.

O Galea

Jul 27th 2012, 09:23

INDEED !

B. Cachia

Jul 26th 2012, 16:18

Well, the Ministry and MEPA spokespersons were apparently asked for their side of the story and provided it.

D Vella

Jul 26th 2012, 16:04

Don't hold your breath Victor . . . if we have a new Government, in no time it will be busy inventing its own brand of abuses !

B. Cachia

Jul 26th 2012, 15:34

No, expropriation is compulsory, it is not merely an offer to purchase one's land or other property. Of course, one may take the Government to court, as has apparently been done.

M Grima

Jul 26th 2012, 13:48

This is different because you actually signed for your shares to be handed over to the government. If you hadn't signed, the National Bank would have gone bankrupt due to liquidity problems and your shares would have been worth zero.

Vera Sant Fournier

Jul 26th 2012, 15:23

Some were forced to sign and threatened, others didn't give in the threats and didn't sign, the government started rumours regarding liquidity telling people to withdraw their funds ,the government did not allow the central bank to do its job and act as a lender of last resort, and the National bank of Malta takeover took place, it was all planned and schemed and the government makes millions off the shares to this day, not to mention the property and lands it took for the owners...The shares where not worth zero. The National and Tagliaferro Banks Act 1973 was passed. On the dark day 22nd March 1974 the Bank of Valletta took over business with Lm43 Million in Assets, 27 Branches and after 9 months, a miraculous Lm1 in profit. http://user.orbit.net.mt/fournier/MNhistory.htm

It's similar minus the threats to the family.

Lina Caruana

Jul 26th 2012, 18:53

X'jigifieri mitlufa?

Ronnie Callus

Jul 26th 2012, 22:29

@ Lina Caruana:
Dawn kienu nies li kellhom art li kienet mikrija ( qbiela) fejn wara li mietu jew ma' kellhomx tfal u lanqas huthom, ma' kienux juru x'ghandhom u wara li jigu nieqsa l-bidwi li jkun jahdem l-art ma' jsibx lil min se' jkompli jhallas. Hawn raba/art li diga ilha hekk ghall aktar minn 30 sena. u aktar.

John Attard

Jul 26th 2012, 12:29

I think youre living in cuckoo land.......why should Dr Gonzi of all times not be happy. He must be, he is investing in his own future now.......im just assuming at the back of my mind what the land will be used for and by whom......if you add one plus one you get 2, my friend.....and yes sometimes you vote for Gonzi and get Vassallo instead...its the way life is !

Charles Grixti

Jul 26th 2012, 13:42

Apparently it is. After all, the Catholic Church never saw anything wrong in expropriating lands from their rightful heirs in exchange for a promise of eternal life either. A very neat trick this as no one can come back and demand a refund.

Lina Caruana

Jul 26th 2012, 10:38

Who are you to say that 50 euros worth of hafur is identical to a stretch of land. Have you any hafur growing land I will search for a piece to grow cabbages instead.

Joe Fenech

Jul 26th 2012, 14:14

Who cares? The point of the matter is that there is space and it is not to be built on!

David Hill

Jul 26th 2012, 14:23

Whay do you expedt?
The Government wont cultivate the land, and once its been taken by them the previous owners are not allowed to cultivate it, so how do you expect anything else to grow there?

R. Cilia

Jul 26th 2012, 14:33

John Borg so what if there is only fodder? It is still their land. Would you give it up without a fight if it was yours? May I remind you that an MP got Lm 70,000 for a stretch of land that was the size of a pavement in width. Miskin iz-zghir!

Anne Farrugia

Jul 26th 2012, 11:00

Mr Vella, every government in Malta, has taken land from members of my family. There is no decent government on the island at all. They are all the same! They just take & you'd be lucky if you get a penny back.

Advert
Advert