The outgoing Parliamentary Ombudsman Mr Anthony C. Mifsud has presented the Case Notes 2022 to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Anglu Farrugia.

One of the case notes published, involved the Planning Authority and a complaint on the rejecting of submissions by interested parties.

This investigation, carried out by the Commissioner for Environment and Planning, followed a complaint against the rejection of written submissions by the Planning Authority following fresh plans submitted at the request of the Planning Board.

The Commissioner explained that the Planning Directorate did not accept written representations that are submitted by recognised interested parties against fresh plans that are submitted following the Planning Board hearing and to this effect the representees are being requested to make their submissions orally during the hearing.

The case notes said that there are certain instances where the Planning Board defer an application to allow the applicant to revise the proposal and address the concerns raised by the Board.

It showed that although, following new submissions, the registered interested parties are informed by the Planning Authority that fresh plans have been submitted, representations that are eventually submitted by the registered interested parties against these new submissions are automatically rejected by the system.

The Commissioner said that the Development Planning Act does not specify that such representations should be rejected but rather that representations should be in writing and that they shall include submissions received by post, by hand or electronic submissions.

Furthermore, even the regulations do not allow the rejection of representations but rather state that submissions should be received at least fifteen days before the hearing, the report said.

It was also noted that submissions on fresh plans following the hearing that are in writing – rather than orally – are in line with the provisions for a fair hearing and also beneficial for a better understanding by the Planning Board in its deliberations on applications.

The Commissioner said that “the complaint against the rejection of written representations following the filing of fresh plans at the request of the Planning Board was found to be justified.”

The Commissioner recommended that following authorisation of fresh submissions by the applicant, the Planning Board also establishes a reasonable period of time within which the registered interested parties may also file their written representations.

The Commissioner also noted that the Planning Authority “did not implement the Commissioner’s recommendation and the case was referred to the Prime Minister and to the House of Representatives in line with the Ombudsman Act.”

The full dossier of Case Notes 2022 can be downloaded by clicking here.

Permalink: PA ignores Commissioner’s recommendation on rejecting submissions