NGOs welcome long-overdue measures but fear that the new proposals may threaten the right to appeal

In response to the current public consultation exercise relating to the automatic suspension of development permits during appeals, several NGOs have made a joint submission with their feedback on the proposed amendments. 

Of great concern to the NGOs was the apparent threat to the right to appeal that the discussion paper proposes. The discussion paper states that appeals must be “relative to objections which have already been submitted to the Planning Authority prior to the determination of the application.” 

The NGOs hope that the Government is not seeking to limit the public’s right to appeal by requiring excessively technical and legalistic grounds of objection, considering that the relative representation period is only 30 days, giving members of the public limited time to engage planning and legal experts in order to submit overly technical objections. 

Moreover, if new information relative to the application emerges after the objection was submitted, or if the application was subject to new developments of which the interested party was not aware of, or for which there was no opportunity to object, the interested party would essentially be unable to submit an appeal based on these new grounds.

The NGOs insist that the “proposal” needs to be clarified so that it does not result in a legislative amendment reducing the public’s access to justice. Appeals should not in any way be restricted to the grounds listed in a representation filed during the representation period.

Moreover, the mention of providing better parameters for the Tribunal to impose fines to deter and limit “frivolous and vexatious appeals” is also of concern since this can be very easily misused to restrict the right to appeal. 

With regards to the suspension of execution of works, the NGOs in question have long called for the necessity to suspend the execution of permits whilst appeal proceedings are underway before the Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. This proposal in the discussion paper has thus been welcomed, as there have been several instances where a development has been built whilst appeal proceedings are underway, resulting in a continuing injustice to appellants as their appeal was rendered an academic exercise.  

However, the NGOs agreed that suspending the execution of works for a mere three months is far too short a time for the appeal to be decided. This short time-frame would put great pressure on the Tribunal, appellants, witnesses etc, and the same considerations apply to the fixing of a time-limit for the Court of Appeal to decide planning appeals. 

The NGOs agreed that the proposal to place a time-limit of one month in case of an appeal for an application which the Minister declares is of strategic significance or of national interest, related to any obligation ensuing from a European Union Act, affecting national security or affecting the interests of the Government is absurd, unjust, and penalises appellants. Such appeals will usually be far more technical and require expert witnesses and resources and compelling appellants and to do this within one month is practically impossible.

The NGOs in question are greatly concerned with any restrictions placed on the right to appeal and reiterate that any attempt to reduce the public’s access to justice and review of administrative decisions will be strongly resisted.

Organisations

• Moviment Graffitti
  
• BirdLife Malta
  
• Ramblers’ Association of Malta
  
• Friends of the Earth Malta
  
• Nature Trust – FEE Malta
  
• Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar
  
• Għawdix

____________________________________

Id-dritt tal-pubbliku li jappella permessi tal-ippjanar mhedded mir-riforma ssuġġerita

L-għaqdiet jilqgħu l-miżuri li ilhom mistennija, iżda jibżgħu li l-proposti l-ġodda jistgħu jheddu d-dritt tal-appell

Bħala rispons għal eżerċizzju ta’ konsultazzjoni pubblika attwali rigward is-sospensjoni awtomatika ta’ permessi tal-iżvilupp waqt appell, diversi għaqdiet issottomew b’mod konġunt il-kummenti tagħhom dwar l-emendi proposti.

Ta’ tħassib kbir għall-għaqdiet kien il-fatt li fost il-proposti tad-dokument ta’ riforma wieħed seta’ jinnota li d-dritt tal-appell jinsab taħt theddida. Id-dokument bl-emendi proposti jgħid li l-appelli jridu jkunu “marbuta ma’ oġġezzjonijiet li jkunu diġà ġew sottomessi lill-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar qabel ma ġiet deċiża l-applikazzjoni.”

L-għaqdiet jittamaw li dan mhux xi tentattiv min-naħa tal-Gvern biex jipprova jirrestrinġi d-dritt tal-pubbliku biex jappella billi jimponi li l-oġġezzjonijiet jridu jkunu bbażati fuq raġunijiet tekniċi u legali żżejjed, speċjalment fid-dawl li l-perjodu li fih wieħed jista’ joġġezzjona huwa biss ta’ 30 jum, u għalhekk il-pubbliku jsib ruħu ristrett minn żmien limitat biex jikkonsulta ma’ esperti legali u tal-ippjanar sabiex ikun jista’ jissottometti oġġezzjonijiet li jissodisfaw kriterji tekniċi ħafna.

Barra dan, jekk toħroġ informazzjoni ġdida marbuta mal-applikazzjoni wara li l-oġġezzjoni tkun ġiet sottomessa, jew jekk iseħħu xi żviluppi ġodda marbuta mal-applikazzjoni li l-parti interessata ma tkunx taf bihom, jew li ma kellhiex iċ-ċans toġġezzjona għalihom, il-parti interessata essenzjalment ma tkunx tista’ tissottometti appell abbażi ta’ dawn ir-raġunijiet il-ġodda.

L-għaqdiet qed jisħqu li din il-proposta jeħtieġ li tiġi ċċarata sabiex ma twassalx f’emenda leġiżlattiva li xxekkel l-aċċess tal-pubbliku għall-ġustizzja. L-appelli m’għandhom bl-ebda mod jkunu ristretti għar-raġunijiet imniżżla f’oġġezzjoni li tkun ġiet sottomessa waqt il-perjodu miftuħ għall-oġġezzjonijiet.

Barra minn hekk, hija wkoll ta’ tħassib il-proposta li t-Tribunal se jkun jista’ jagħmel użu minn parametri aħjar biex jimponi multi sabiex jiskoraġġixxi u jillimita “appelli frivoli u vessatorji” għax din tista’ tintuża b’mod abbużiv biex d-dritt tal-appell jiġi ristrett.

Fir-rigward tas-sospensjoni tal-eżekuzzjoni tax-xogħlijiet, l-għaqdiet ilhom għal żmien twil jappellaw biex tiddaħħal din l-emenda biex l-eżekubbiltà tal-permessi tiġi sospiża waqt li jkun għaddej appell quddiem it-Tribunal u l-Qorti tal-Appell. Għalhekk, din il-proposta fid-dokument ta’ riforma ġiet milqugħa b’sodisfazzjon peress li kien hemm diversi drabi fejn proġett ta’ żvilupp tlesta waqt li fl-istess ħin kien għadu għaddej l-appell, li wassal biex l-appellanti ġew miċħuda mill-ġustizzja u l-appell ġie ridott għal eżercizzju kożmetiku.

Madankollu, l-għaqdiet qed isostnu li l-perjodu ta’ tliet xhur għas-sospensjoni tax-xogħlijiet huwa qasir wisq biex jilħaq jiġi deċiż l-appell. Dan iż-żmien limitat se jitfa’ pressjoni kbira fuq it-Tribunal, l-appellanti u x-xhieda. L-istess tħassib japplika wkoll għall-iffissar ta’ limitu ta’ żmien għall-Qorti tal-Appelli biex tiddeċiedi dwar appelli tal-ippjanar.

L-għaqdiet qablu li l-proposta li jiġi impost limitu ta’ żmien ta’ xahar fil-każ ta’ appell għal applikazzjoni li l-Ministru jiddikjara li ġġorr sinifikanza strateġika jew hija ta’ interess nazzjonali, b’rabta ma’ xi obbligu li joħroġ mill-Att tal-Unjoni Ewropea, li taffettwa s-sigurtà nazzjonali jew taffettwa l-interessi tal-Gvern, hija assurda, inġusta, u kontra l-interessi tal-appellanti. Appelli bħal dawn ġeneralment ikunu ħafna aktar tekniċi u jkunu jeħtieġu xhieda esperti, riżorsi u appellanti konvinċenti. Li dan kollu jsir f’xahar huwa prattikament impossibbli.

L-għaqdiet inkwistjoni esprimew it-tħassib kbir tagħhom fir-rigward ta’ restrizzjonijiet fuq id-dritt tal-appell u tennew li kwalunkwe tentattiv biex ikun hemm xkiel fl-aċċess tal-pubbliku għall-ġustizza u fir-reviżjoni ta’ deċiżjonijiet amministrattivi se jsib reżistenza ħarxa.

Għaqdiet

• Moviment Graffitti
  
• BirdLife Malta
  
• Ramblers’ Association of Malta
  
• Friends of the Earth Malta
  
• Nature Trust – FEE Malta
  
• Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar
  
• Għawdix