Man intimidated in his hom inspects illegal developmen

A man from Rabat is claiming he was intimidated in his home last Wednesday by another man who appears to have been incensed because the Planning Authority (PA) inspected an ongoing illegal development in a field in Wied irRum, a valley on the outskirts of Rabat.

On Wednesday morning, Noel Ciantar was at his home when he was confronted by an angry and agitated Mark Farrugia, from Dingli, who drove into Ciantar’s farm in his car and, to Ciantar’s surprise, insisted that he had a right of way through Ciantar’s private garden to a field that Farrugia claimed he had recently purchased in Wied ir-Rum, although he carried no documentary evidence to this effect. The field had been visited by PA enforcement officers earlier, while the illegal development was in full swing.

Referring to the development, Farrugia told Ciantar that it had been reported to the authorities, saying: “You are known to report people” – evidently insinuating that Ciantar had made a report which had instigated the PA’s visit, which apparently led to Farrugia’s reaction.

An illegal room in Wied ir-Rum

The development consists of the construction of a small building in a field in the middle of the valley, a few metres away from the watercourse. Wied ir-Rum is a highly protected valley and part of a Special Area of Conservation of international importance within the Natura 2000 network established and protected under the EU Habitats Directive.

This newspaper has learnt that, for many years now, Farrugia has held another property in the same valley, adjacent to the field. According to the PA’s public website, that property was also the subject of a PA enforcement notice in 2010 (reference EC/00576/10) in the name of the same Mark Farrugia for similar illegal development of rooms described on the PA’s server as “the construction of two rooms and a concrete platform on scheduled land” all without a permit. The illegality is further described by the PA as “rural rooms or structures – not agriculture.”

There are no planning applications, either outstanding or approved, on either of the sites for their development or for their sanctioning.

A close examination of aerial images and photographs of the site of the developments shows that the field is being used for bird trapping, while the property has also been developed for hunting and leisure, with rooms and a large pond or ponds having been developed close to the watercourse.

According to planning policies applicable to Outside Development Zones, a recognised farmer would require a full development permit to erect any building in a field for agricultural purposes. Construction developments for hunting or bird-trapping purposes are not permitted in the relevant rural planning policy. It is very difficult for a farmer to obtain a development permit in a highly protected area, let alone a permit for use in connection with bird trapping.

Ciantar alleges intimidation

Meanwhile, Ciantar has dismissed Farrugia’s claim of a right to access his property through the garden of his home and says that this claim on Wednesday only arose out of an act of intimidation. He has filed a report with the police over the incident.

Talking to this newspaper, Ciantar insisted that the previous owner of the field, who had sold it to Farrugia, had never entered Ciantar’s property in order to access the field, and that he had only come to know the previous owner at the time when he wanted to sell the field in 2016. At this time, the seller claimed that he had a right of way somewhere on Ciantar’s land, but did not produce a contract of title to prove his claim. Ciantar had rejected the seller’s claim immedi- ately, which he had never exercised, and even then, the seller had never mentioned a right of way through Ciantar’s home garden.

“If the seller never claimed a right of access through my private home garden, how come Farrugia, assuming he truly bought the property, is claiming such a right? This is not only outrageous, it is plainly ridiculous,” Ciantar told this newspaper.

Moreover, the farmers who tilled the field under title from the seller, before Farrugia occupied it and whom Ciantar does not even know or recognise, had never accessed the field through Ciantar’s property. Even Farrugia himself had never sought to enter the field, which he appears to have acquired some months ago because he has tilled it already, through Ciantar’s farm. Ciantar said that the field is fully and conveniently accessible to Farrugia through its historic access next to Farrugia’s other property in the same valley. He queried why Farrugia would want to cause an inconvenience to himself by having to access one property from an entrance on one side of a valley and then having to travel a couple of kilometres around the valley to enter his other field, which lies a few metres away, through another side of the valley?

Ciantar argued that it was bizarre and even contradictory that Farrugia had only sought to exercise his ‘right’ on Wednesday, after Farrugia had been irritated by the report to the PA, mentioned by Farrugia himself, about the illegality in the field, when Farrugia had not sought to access his field with the materials and machinery for the illegal development through Ciantar’s property.

Had Farrugia accessed his field with the construction material through his other fields as he had done previously, why did he seek to access his property through Ciantar’s farm after the PA’s visit?

Ciantar was also concerned because, although he had called Police Headquarters and Rabat Police Station, asking for police protection in his home, and was promised the arrival of the Rapid Intervention Unit, the police never actually turned up on site, while Ciantar felt intimidated by Farrugia’s anger and had to seek shelter in his home to avoid Farrugia’s physical contact.

Work on illegal construction continues despite PA visit

While the intimidation of a private person because of a legitimate action by any authority is deplorable, the facts of the case reveal another unacceptable twist of events regarding the development.

It appears that although the PA visited the site on Wednesday morning, and that development work on the room was temporarily halted at the time the PA officers visited the site, eventually works recommenced later that day. It is not clear if the PA officer had requested a stoppage of works, or whether the officer or someone else had given a green light later.

This newspaper is in possession of a series of photographs showing the evolution of the ongoing development. Photographs taken early on Wednesday show ongoing but advanced construction work on the building, with the walls appearing to have been given a quick coat of plaster on the exterior during the construction phase – a technique often used in order to give the impression that a structure had been there for a while. Photos from mid-morning on Wednesday show the PA officers on site. This newspaper also holds shots of the development on Wednesday afternoon, with work ongoing and approaching completion. Further photos from Thursday morning show the pouring of concrete as the room is roofed over.

The photographs actually show that Farrugia was in his field on Wednesday morning while the work was going on and at the time of the PA’s visit, before turning up on Ciantar’s property. This state of affairs does, in fact, beg the question as to why Farrugia travelled about two kilometres with his car from his field to seek reentry to it through Ciantar’s farm within minutes of the PA’s visit.

Farrugia was Planning Authority Minister Ian Borg’s middleman in controversial property deal

Farrugia was in the news in 2015 when a family of farmers from Santa Katerina, on the outskirts of Rabat, alleged to this newspaper that Ian Borg, now Minister responsible for the Planning Authority, had acquired a property from his father, who is over 60 years old and who has a history of mental health issues, after Farrugia had allegedly taken the man, who is Farrugia’s uncle, out for a