Thousands of euros in fines have been lost because wardens were under the impression that the Sliema-Gżira bus lane was illegal and so they only issued warnings.
The Times of Malta report carried yesterday, quoting official correspondence that a bus lane in a two-lane road was “illegal”, sparked a hornet’s nest and caused confusion among motorists.
The correspondence between the Sliema council and David Soler, officer of the Central Region, an entity monitoring the local warden service, says wardens were only issuing warnings because they had been informed by local tribunal commissioner Lynn Zahra that the bus lane was illegal. However, both the transport watchdog and Dr Zahra yesterday denied this. Kenneth De Martino, Guard and Warden Services chairman, also insisted the bus lane was legal.
The issue surfaced after Sliema councillor Michael Briguglio asked for statistics on the number of fines issued to the “cowboys” who speeded through the bus lane to avoid traffic congestion, endangering pedestrians in the process.
Dr Zahra insisted yesterday she had never said the bus lane was illegal nor instructed wardens to issue warnings instead of tickets. She also questioned how wardens could have dished out warnings if motorists sped away.
“Dr Briguglio is basing himself on pure hearsay and whatever correspondence he says he has seen did not emanate from the tribunal,” she said.
Dr Zahra added that directives issued by the tribunal were communicated to wardens in writing through its registrar.
However, she insisted she had never issued instructions on warnings rather than tickets.
When confronted with Dr Zahra’s reply and asked where he got his information from, Mr Soler said wardens had told him the bus lane had been declared illegal by Dr Zahra and so they were issuing warnings.
Mr De Martino said the contents of the e-mail seen by the Times of Malta had been misinterpreted and he insisted that the Gżira bus lane was perfectly legal.
“The Central Region instructed wardens not to issue tickets but warnings on particular days, as part of an educational campaign. For the rest of the time, they had to enforce the law,” he said.
Mr De Martino also pointed out that local tribunal commissioners had the right to interpret the law as they deemed fit but were not authorised to give instructions to wardens. Such powers were the sole prerogative of the various regions managing the local enforcement system, he said.
In a statement, Transport Malta pointed out that the Gżira bus lane was in line with subsidiary legislation 65.05, which dealt with traffic signs and carriageway markings.
It noted the law gave it the authority to reserve a priority lane that could only be used by buses and any other passenger transport vehicles, motorcycles, pedal cycles and any vehicles on priority duty. For this reason, the transport watchdog argued that it was not simply a bus lane but a priority lane, which could be also used by electric and LPG-powered vehicles and bicycles.
The watchdog also pointed out that there was no legislation specifying the minimum number of lanes necessary to have a priority lane, contrary to what was said in the correspondence.
Nevertheless, Transport Malta used the term bus lane to highlight the priority lane and painted it in green. In the past, the watchdog always referred to it as a bus lane and the distinction between a bus lane and a priority lane only started being made yesterday.
Exchange between Sliema council and Central Region committee
“The wardens informed me that only warnings are being issued. This, since Dr Lynn Zahra, Commissioner at the Tribunal, informed them that it is illegal to have a bus lane when there are only two lanes.
“A bus lane must have another two lanes adjacent to it. In fact, the bus lane at Mrieħel was taken off for the reason there were only two lanes, one of which was the bus lane.”