Former university rector Juanito Camilleri threw his arms into the air in relief as the Planning Authority refused to revoke a permit issued to him for the extension of a winery, after a procedural error by the authority itself put the validity of the permit in doubt.
“Revoking this permit would be a travesty of justice,” an animated Prof. Camilleri said during a PA board hearing yesterday.
“This issue has already appeared in the media, and people assumed the mistake was mine. Damage has already been done to my reputation and to the profile of the university because of someone else’s mistake, and I expect someone to take responsibility.”
A permit for the extension of a two-storey winery in Siġġiewi was issued to Prof. Camilleri in June, with the Planning Commission board giving the go-ahead despite the development having been recommended for refusal.
The issue arose because new PA procedures stipulate that, where the board indicates that it intends to go against the recommendation, the case should be deferred while the Planning Directorate draws up a new set of conditions before going to a binding vote.
Revoking this permit would be a travesty of justice
It appears that, in the case of Prof. Camilleri’s permit, the matter was put to a vote during the first hearing, in violation of procedure, prompting the directorate to request that the board revoke the permit.
The permit was issued officially during a second hearing a few weeks later, though some doubt arose regarding whether the binding decision had already been taken. During yesterday’s hearing, lawyer Ian Stafrace, appearing for Prof. Camilleri, argued that even if an error had taken place, it had no material bearing on the final decision, as required by law, and therefore the permit should not be revoked.
He said it was unjust for the applicant to be “confronted with the harshest penalty possible” by having his permit revoked under such circumstances.
Dr Stafrace also accused the authority of having led Prof. Camilleri on by issuing a permit that it knew was likely to be revoked shortly after, having been aware of the error when the permit was issued.
Several members of the board took up the point, stressing that the applicant should not be made to suffer for the PA’s own mistake.
“Applying the guillotine when the mistake came from the authority itself sends the wrong message,” board member Ryan Callus said.
Ultimately, the board voted by five to four against revoking the permit, but not before the hearing had descended into minute technical details, with both the board and Dr Stafrace admitting they were in “uncharted territory”.
The board even briefly considered the possibility of revoking the permit and then immediately considering it again for approval, although this suggestion was swiftly turned down.