Armier is once again in the news because of squatters. The local council of Mellieħa is attempting to move 12 caravans and their assorted paraphernalia (including what looks like entire sitting rooms located under securely installed gazebos annexed to each van/caravan) from Little Armier. It has in fact served the 12 families in question with notices giving them until the end of this week to clear the area. However, this being Malta, the caravan owners have indicated that they have absolutely no intention of budging, because according to them they are protected by a “political agreement” reached with the boathouse owners in Armier.
I assume that they are referring to the infamous secret pre-electoral deal between the Prime Minister and Armier Developments Ltd (the boathouse owners’ lobby) in February 2008, a mere three weeks before the election.
Both the Nationalist Party and the Labour Party have been courting the Armier squatters for years, presumably because the 1200 illegal boathouses translate into approximately 2400 to 4800 votes. Taken in the context of elections won with a mere 1500 votes it is easy to understand why the two parties are loath to risk losing even just one vote due to an irritated boathouse squatter.
The Armier lobby has power in numbers.
It appears that Prime Minister Gonzi has signed a written declaration promising not to demolish boathouses built before 1992. I assume that this agreement is based on the principle of Squatter’s Rights, a laymen's term for adverse possession in the legal world. The principle is simple, if a property or land is not used by its rightful owner (in this case the entire population of Malta) and someone lays claim to it and occupies it without permission for a number of years, the squatter could gain control over it. In effect if you build a home on public land and manage to evade eviction or demolition for several years, the property becomes yours.
However I cannot for the life of me understand how this principle can be extended to caravans, unless the caravan owners are claiming that their vans and gazebos have been parked in the same spot for the last 18 years.
I feel that the entire scenario is a dangerous one. As a law abiding citizen I am not pleased that people who have taken the law into their own hands and constructed themselves a nice little beach house on land that does not belong to them are now being rewarded. Some of the “owners” have even made a quick buck by selling the properties, which were not theirs in the first place. (In August 2008 MaltaToday revealed that a number of boathouses were being advertised for sale at a price of approximately €35,000 for the transfer of keys of a boathouse, fully serviced with water and electricity.)
I cannot understand how the approach taken in Armier squares off with the more aggressive attitude taken by the Land Department in other cases of people occupying public land. Just last week the department demolished 10 stables and a number of rooms built on public property in Naxxar. Is this a case of different weights and measures? Would the stables still be standing if their “owner” had constructed them adjoining the beach huts in Armier?
Public land should be just that – public. Government (and the opposition) should not be swayed because of the number of people illegally occupying a particular area. What about the even bigger number of people who have not encroached on public land, and who feel aggrieved by the sheer unfairness of it all. Are we trying to perpetuate the feeling that it pays to flout the law in Malta?
In my opinion the country sorely needs a number of camp sites and facilities for people who want to spend days, weeks or even months camping near the sea in summer. These camp sites would have proper sanitary facilities – toilets, showers, water connections and electricity points – and users would rent their spot at a low cost and pay for the services they use.
The camp sites would be landscaped and cleaned regularly in order to look good from the beach. We do not have all that many sandy beaches in Malta so we cannot afford to turn the few we have into veritable shantytowns.
As for the boathouse debacle – perhaps the government should tackle the situation by issuing a clear policy regarding squatters. A policy that would apply all over Malta and not just in Armier. If the decision is to grant squatters who have occupied a property for 20 years or more some form of rights, then the rights should come associated with obligations and also be controlled according to a framework agreement.
For example in the case of Armier it could be decided to rebuild the entire shantytown, including extensive landscaping to cover the buildings. This is what MEPA would impose on any other builder in such a scenic spot – there should be no difference in such a scenario. The legitimate holders of the beach rooms would then have to pay for maintenance of the grounds, just as normal owners of a property pay for the maintenance of common parts for buildings.
The agreement should also guarantee access to third parties, for example for shower and toilet facilities.
Unfortunately at this stage it is clear that the Armier squatters are here to stay. Someone, however, should seize the bull by the horns and regularise the situation as soon as possible.