FAA Vindicad in its call for article 39A

The environment group Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar notes that the Save Ramla Committee has submitted proof to MEPA that the Outline Permit for the Ramla villas project was based on “false, misleading or incorrect” information supplied by the developers. Not only will the permitted development be encroaching on a public right of way, ie. public land, but also, in his permit application, the developer failed to list a 1984 application on the same site as he was obliged to do. This application had been refused at the initial stage, at reconsideration, and even when fresh plans were submitted.

It is significant to note that this application was refused “on grounds of policy” by none other than Lorry Sant.

The Save Ramla Committee has called MEPA to revoke and annul both the Outline and the Full Development permit as MEPA is empowered to do by Article 39A, in cases where it is presented with false, misleading or incorrect information in the permit application.

This confirms that FAA was correct in maintaining, ever since the MEPA hearing, that the granting of the Ramla permit is abusive and should be revoked through the imposition of Article 39A. It is to be recalled that Mr. Andrew Calleja, MEPA Chairman had pledged to stand down if FAA’s call for Article 39A was substantiated. This has now been done, therefore FAA expects Mr. Calleja to honour his word. FAA also calls for the resignation of rest of the MEPA Board ie. Catherine Galea, Sandra Sladden, Joseph Falzon, Simone Vella, Leonard Callus, Saviour Gauci, Michael Ellul, Godwin Debono and Joe Tabone Iacono, who voted in favour of the project, in spite of the many irregularities that were brought to their attention during the hearing.

In view of the very serious shortcomings that took place in the processing of the Ramla permit, it is felt that a refusal to resign on the part of the MEPA Board would call into question all further decisions taken by this board. In the light of the evidence that has now been revealed, FAA maintains that the Minister of the Environment and the Prime Minister have a sacrosanct duty towards the public to call an immediate inquiry into this case.