Robert Musumeci's car park photo Stasi investigation: part II
No! Please, no! Not that! I swear I will never take a photograph of Robert Musumeci again!
When his request to the police for the investigation of a man who took a picture of him didn’t bear the required fruit, and he was told that the man had committed no crime, Robert Musumeci was forced to use a lawyer (going cheap or free: his lover’s brother) and go after a newspaper and a letter-writer instead.
The Times, Wednesday, 4th February 2009
Mayor sues for libel
Siġġiewi Mayor Robert Musumeci filed a libel suit claiming that a letter published in The Sunday Times was defamatory. Mr Musumeci, an architect, filed the suit against editor Steve Mallia and George Micallef who wrote the letter that appeared on January 25. The letter, entitled Mepa’s Ethics Are Confused, referred to a photo published two weeks earlier. The photo showed Mr Musumeci talking to a Mepa board member in a car park after a board meeting on a permit application. Lawyer Josè Herrera signed the libel suit.
And this is the letter, which doesn’t strike me as remotely libellous.
The Sunday Times, 25th January 2009
Mepa’s ethics are confused
George Micallef, Valletta
The picture of architect Robert Musumeci discussing an application that was being discussed in front of Mepa’s Development Control Commission (DCC) with architect Claude Borg, one of the DCC members, is the perfect example of what is wrong with Mepa.
The fact that Mepa took this matter lightly and laughed it off makes it even worse.
We have a situation where a board member leaves the room to discuss a case with an applicant, who then gets angry when someone records their encounter and calls in the police who harass tthat person rather than those whose actions may be unethical.
What is even more serious is that the application involved Floriana. Claude Borg should withdraw from the DCC when cases in Valletta and Floriana are discussed as he is the co-ordinator of the Valletta and Floriana Rehabilitation Committee and he is already consulted by Mepa.
No member should be allowed to pass judgment twice, wearing different hats. But then Mepa’s ethics are, to say the least, confused.
16 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
And who is presiding the case? Would it be CSH by any chance?
All in the Family cum Marx Brothers.
Klikka tal-wahx.
Silvio Meli
http://www2.justice.gov.mt/kawzi/ccm_case.asp?FrmCM=234012&lng=ENG
David, I quite like the name “The Old Boiler”. So I will rephrase your questions. And who is presiding the case? Would it be The Old Boiler by any chance?
It’s Silvio Meli
http://www2.justice.gov.mt/kawzi/ccm_case.asp?FrmCM=234012&lng=ENG
U ghaliex Musumeci biss ghamel libell? Ghalfejn il-membru tad-DCC baqa kwiet?
Ghax m’ghandux mara fonqla, fiswa, xewwiexa u prepotenti.
Il-kelma “mara” mhix preciza hawn. Le le, miniex nghid xarabank minn wara. Imma mara tfisser dik li hu mizzewweg lilha.
Dan hu kaz differenti.
Il-kelma tibda bil-“p”.
[Daphne – Ghandek zball. Colloquial Maltese uses the words ‘mara’ and ‘ragel’ – literally woman and man – to signify spouse but the real word is ‘zewg’, as it is in Arabic. The fact that ‘my man’ and ‘my woman’ passed into the official language as a substitute for spouse indicates that marriage wasn’t really as widespread as we like to think it was. Magistrate Herrera is actually il-mara ta’ Musumeci, but she’s not zewgu.]
Daphne in that case it would be ‘martu’ not ‘zewgu’. Martu and zewgha. Then there’s zewgt (not to be confused with zewg) which means ‘two’, ex. zewgt itfal.
[Daphne – Martu is from mara, so same difference. What I’m pointing out here is that in Arabic spouse is ‘zewg’ just as it is supposed to be in Maltese (hence ‘zwieg’ and ‘zewgi’). But somewhere along the line, probably as a result of there being more unions that were not marriages than unions which were – among ordinary people at least – ‘my woman’ and ‘my man’ became synonyms for ‘my husband’ and ‘my wife’, when clearly they were not because they described different realities. ‘My woman’ is what a man would have used for a woman who was NOT his wife.]
Very good point Riya: che si scusa, s’accusa…
Darba kont naf wiehed tal- Muzew li, hekk kif konfrontat b’xi karonjata li tirrefletti hazin fuq l-impressjoni kerubina li kellu ta’ Malta, kien ifarfarha minn fuqu b’xi kumment bhal: ‘Jaghmlu huma’, jew ‘Mhiex affari tieghi. Ma nindahalx’.
Nimmagina n-nies jibda jinteressahom f’hnizrijiet bhal dawn biss meta jigu direttament effetwati minnhom. Kif qal Churchill, ‘democracy is a crisis-activated system’.
Li tfisser: Meta jaqla daqqa ta’ ponn xi hadd iehor tigi titmejjel, izda meta taqla daqqa ta’ ponn INT tistenna espressjona franka, sinciera u assoluta ta’ rettezza gudizzjali.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re9bZEzNZwE&feature=related
Listen to this:
“No one had originally commented on what Perits Musumeci and Borg were discussing in the MEPA car park. It was the over-reaction, hauling a Floriana resident up in front of the police on trumped-up charges and demanding that he destroy the photo that confirmed suspicions.
….
What about architects who are involved in politics and therefore should lead by example, constantly applying for permits which contravene MEPA regulations, and winning them at the Reconsideration stage? Or these same architects making a packet by winning permits for abusive developments through sanctioning.
These architects bring disrepute to their profession and to the main political Parties and unfortunately confirm in the public mind that politics is a dirty business.”
Astrid Vella’s comment to the article above – The Times online
[Daphne – ‘Perits’. I groan inwardly.]
Yes, I know. Looks like it is a case of 2 Perits and 1 parrot.
Perits? Bil-munqar? Hi x’inhi l-gazzetti t-tnejn juzawhom ghall-istess raguni.
Perfectly fair comment if you ask me.
Architects discussing applications with MEPA seems to be the only way you can get an application reviewed (and if you’re lucky approved)!
I have been waiting for more than a year to get permission to make minor amendments to a room in Valletta. The application is still pending.
Half the people that I spoke to (friends and family, not contacts!) invariably tell me ‘you should have used Musumeci as your architect’ or ‘you should have never applied and just made the changes’.
I disagreed and wanted to do things the right way. The result is I have been proven wrong and still cannot move into my house!
In other words, through experience, I think that speaking to MEPA in car parks might be a solution to a problem which is MEPA and it’s inaccessibility.
In my application for instance, I am open to suggestions and prepared to amend my plans to address MEPAs concerns. For this to happen, some form of discussion would need to take place. If this is permitted as part of the process it would speed up resolution of applications (and we would be able to do away with the car park). If I am not mistaken, you only get the chance to speak in the reconsideration phase and getting to that point in my case took over a year.