No policy is cast in stone, not even MEPA’s current policies.

There are hundreds if not thousands of private individuals who could benefit enormously from a review of certain policies regarding properties built when MEPA and its current policies were not yet set up.

Not everyone , is “lucky” enough to carry the Mintoff surname.

The first step would be a the compilation of a sixteen year long chronological diary of all the abuse designed by Mintoff.

Our own black book.

There is a strong possibility that this house was built on land which wasn’t his, that there were no permits to build it and that public employees were used to build it. And the courts awarded him Lm360,000 from tax-payers money and lets him keep the property instead of penalising him and expropriating it.

That they have the audacity to go screaming to the ECHR claiming foul is not surprising. There is a wonderful expression in Maltese for their behaviour that compares their faces to their backsides.

What is bewildering is that the right questions were not asked by the lawyer in question and that the judges in their wisdom thought it fit to dispense with taxpayers’ money in this way. Who were they? They are ultimately responsible for this miscarriage of justice.

What were they afraid of – his wrath or that of his supporters. What sort of justice was this?

It is all too easy to lump the burden on that taxpayer, who gets lumped with also having to pay for the political crimes that occurred under Mintoff’s watch and any other human right abuses too.

Why successive Nationalist governments treated Mintoff and his henchmen with kid gloves is totally incomprehensible and disgusting. Not even a word in Parliament or in the media seem to have been spoken or written about these dubious acquisitions and alleged use of government labour and materials in construction and/or building access to the country property mentioned above.

In the meantime the ‘progressive and moderate Mintoff Labour Party’ has the gall to even mention ‘corruption’ in the direction of the NP

Unsuspecting nonentities who end up unexpectedly in a similar situation with a tiny property built with some slight differences to the original permits (decades before by some one else), are not so lucky.

They are made to pay the full price for something someone else did, with an enforcement notice and end up seeing their tiny investment up in smoke. Would it not be worthwhile all round if similar “amnesties” were given to these as well?