Is-Simblija lies in a fertile valley near Rabat and Dingli. It is a medieval hamlet of rural dwellings containing a number of interesting heritage features.
It is a Grade 2 national monument and was restored about a dozen years ago under an EU-funded project. It is set deep in the Maltese countryside and, almost exceptionally for Malta, lies in a relatively untouched area of natural landscape.
For this reason, and because it is important historically, Is-Simblija attracts many Maltese walkers and tourists keen to enjoy the medieval site and the idyllic countryside.
Regrettably, access to one of Malta’s most beautiful rural and archaeological sites is being hindered by a family that has occupied the farmhouse for generations. ‘No entry’ signs have been set up along a road giving the easiest access to the site and this has outraged visitors. Public access to Is-Simblija has long been a bone of contention. The Ramblers’ Association has often complained about the inaccessibility of the site, which persists more than 10 years after the project was completed.
The situation is complex. It would appear that the farming family who lives there is extremely possessive of its position.
A series of parliamentary questions by Labour environment spokesman Leo Brincat have established that while the land is subject to an agricultural rent, this is currently not being accepted by the authorities (presumably pending the resolution of its transfer from the farmer to the Superintendent of Cultural Heritage).
In a typical governmental game of pass-the-parcel, involving the Minister for Resources, the Minister for Tourism and the Minister for Lands, the matter remains unresolved and the public, including tourists, continue to be prevented from enjoying the history or beauty of the site. While one understands the sensitivities of the case, it is the government’s job to resolve them as equitably as possible.
The bottom line must be that public access to government-owned land must be fully respected above other considerations and the need for everybody to enjoy national heritage sites must be paramount.
There have been far too many cases over the years of the illegal acquisition of public land by individuals or the denial of access to public land to members of the public.
There is a legal presumption that all property over which no one has a valid legal title belongs to the government. The onus of proof of ownership is on whosoever claims right of ownership.
Public rights of way should be established and marked accordingly. The sections of the Civil Code regulating the right of entry and passage over private property should be amended to establish public rights of way. Such an amendment would probably cover the case arising at Is-Simblija, but it would also cater more generally for the rights of bona fide ramblers.
The Minister for Tourism has rightly focused on ‘rural tourism’ as another segment in the tourism product. Is-Simblija is a microcosm of the problems that still need to be resolved if this new niche is to be properly exploited.
The organisational challenges include rights of way and access to sites, the clearance of unsightly dumping, the identification of suitable areas for such tourism, the training of guides capable of conducting informed countryside sessions and a code for the co-habitation of hunters with others. None of these is yet in place.
If rural tourism is truly to become a niche offer they must be addressed.