I refer to the article ‘Hotel owners take action against Land Department’, (The Sunday Times of Malta, September 28),

I think the incredible saga that has evolved is not sufficiently well explained in this article. There was nothing mysterious or arcane in the manner in which the present road was included in the schemes.

The road was schemed as a public road as it was necessary to serve the interests of the public; naturally one has to understand that any private interest affected by that road would have to be duly compensated. But are we expected to do without roads as some hotelier may have a project to develop a property for his own private interest?

Not only was the road in question in Marsalforn duly schemed, it was also open to the public and accessed by it.

It was only following illegal works carried out by the owners that the public was denied the use of this road.

Enforcement action was taken against the developers blocking the road and the Board of Planning Appeal ordered the removal of the obstacles.

No action, however, has been taken to keep the road open to the public. This led to complaints not only by the undersigned but by several people in the locality.

It is wrong to state that the land was being transferred to third parties. That is not what is happening; the Land Department had started proceedings under the law to acquire the property to be used as a publicly owned road. The undersigned had undertaken to effect payment for the taking over of the land abutting his property.

Also inexplicable is the manner in which the developer has managed to delay the opening of the road by claiming a violation of his fundamental rights, which has been pending for the past two years, and blocking progress in the matter. I believe, as do a number of other local residents who have had reason to complain, that the opening of this road is manifestly in the public interest.

The proceedings in relation to the taking over and opening of this road were explicit and open, and the landlord was invited to put in his point of view before a decision was taken by the Land Department and a contract was signed with the undersigned.