26 November 2006 Rating 18% No Comment  

Din l-Art Helwa has rejected the contents and demands of a judicial letter filed by the owners of Ta? Cenc against its president Martin Galea. In a counter letter filed in the Civil Courts this week, Din l-Art Helwa described the allegations as "manifestly unfounded" and confirmed it will not be withdrawing the petition against a proposed villa development in the area it submitted recently to Parliament, as demanded by the Ta? Cenc owners. Palazzo Palina Holdings Limited and Real Finanz filed a judicial letter on 6th November calling on DLH to withdraw the petition, which they described as "misleading" and requested Mr Galea to make good for any damages incurred. The Ta? Cenc owners insist the petition was full of half-truths, misinformation and failed to reflect the true nature of the development as proposed. Citing Article 9 of the Constitution of Malta, Din l-Art Helwa's counter letter refers to the State?s duty to protect the countryside?s historical and artistic heritage through the drafting of laws. The petition to Parliament, Din l-Art Helwa argues, was undertaken in observance of this very principle, was an affirmation of the principle by its 10,000 signatories and as such, Din l-Art Helwa will not accede to the demand for its withdrawal. The organisation said it has both the right and the obligation to protect the natural and cultural heritage of Malta and Gozo. It has been doing just that since 1965, the letter stresses, adding that DLH "will certainly not accept" what it described as an attempt to undermine its fundamental principles?. The Ta? Cenc owners are also holding Mr Galea responsible for damages on the basis "that as one of the ?consultants? in the review of the environment impact statement, Din l-Art Helwa failed to honour the responsibilities pertaining to this sensitive role by adopting a highly biased and, in many cases, unsubstantiated or poorly substantiated position". In its judicial letter Din l-Art Helwa emphasised that it has always acted with the utmost honesty and integrity and with the sole aim of safeguarding the nation?s heritage. Din l-Art Helwa recognised it does not have the right to decide on the development application, which, it stresses, seeks to develop land located outside the designated development zone. It does, however, affirm its right and duty to comment on the development and its effect on the environment. The Ta? Cenc owners have also protested against the use of "misleading and malicious" photographs accompanying the petition, which, they point out, depict areas not included in the actual proposed development. As such, the owners contend the photographs give the false impression that the areas depicted will be destroyed by the development. Din l-Art Helwa, however, argues that any form of development at Ta Cenc could very well stand to damage the archaeological value and mar the aesthetic quality of the area as a whole. According to the owners, the total area being proposed in the draft environmental impact statement comprises 6.86 per cent of the entire Ta? Cenc area, while the total footprint of the proposed villas will constitute 1.18 per cent of the total Ta? Cenc area. Although the development as proposed is to be located in one section of the wider Ta? Cenc area, Din l-Art Helwa stresses it and the petition?s signatories firmly believe that any development in the environs would scar the area in its entirety. As such, Din l-Art Helwa argues the photographs are valid in that they were used to demonstrate the natural beauty of the total Ta Cenc area. Dr Philip Manduca signed Din l-Art Helwa?s judicial letter.