Owners of scheduled properties are not legally bound to carry out maintenance works to preserve them, Times of Malta has learnt.
Scheduling, or the process of legally protecting heritage, is only mostly effective in shielding a historic site against aggressive development, such as demolition, change of use and development.
According to the manager of Mepa’s heritage planning unit, Joe Magro Conti, scheduling gives direction about managing heritage items rather than “protecting it in actual terms”.
“Actual protection is the onus of the owner who is obliged by law and ethics to care for heritage items declared by the State agencies such as Mepa in consultation with the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage.”
In cases of unplanned or illegal developments or of vandalism, the issue is directly one of policing and enforcement
Scheduling could not stop the removal of several painted old signs in Valletta, which lent the capital its distinctive character.
Times of Malta recently highlighted the disappearance of a sign that marked a former tobacconist store in East Street and bore the lettering “G. Borg, Tobacco Merchant, Established 1868”.
Wooden shutters of a vacant property in Santa Lucia Street that bore the sign “Private Room” had also been removed, with its entrance walled up by incongruous stone slabs instead.
Since Mepa does not know the property owners, all it could do was affix a call notice to the entrance, asking the owners to contact the authority.
“There still remain unfortunate cases of non-compliance with the law and one’s obligations as a citizen, such as the removal, damage or destruction of heritage items without the consent or knowledge of the competent State agencies, even if the immovable item is privately owned,” Mr Magro Conti said.
“It is strongly advised that one should seek professional advice from the competent authorities about methodology and procedures before taking any action to intervene on a heritage item.”
The Deputy Superintendant of Cultural Heritage, Nathaniel Cutajar, explained that scheduling was most effective in regulating development on cultural heritage monuments.
Development, in this sense, includes demolition, change of use and even restoration.
“The greatest threat to cultural properties, including historic buildings, is posed by new development,” Mr Cutajar said. “In this sense, scheduling has been of great help in ensuring that new development does not destroy recognised cultural monuments and buildings – as used to happen only a few decades ago.”
However, there is no official tasked with monitoring the island’s most important scheduled treasures, ensuring they are in good condition and not vandalised. Monitoring only occurs when construction is about to take place on an archeologically sensitive site.
“Naturally, monitoring can only be put in place for legally permitted developments,” Mr Cutajar noted.
“In cases of unplanned or illegal developments or of vandalism, the issue is directly one of policing and enforcement.
“The Superintendence and Mepa can both intervene on the basis of their respective laws to stop works deemed to be in breach of law.
“In cases of suspected criminal activity, the case is turned over directly to the police.”