The case involving the Gwardamangia garage that was the target of a Commission against Corruption investigation in the 1990s has been filed with the Ombudsman, this newsroom has learnt.
The commission's case centred on a licence for panel beating which, the Commission said, was obtained through certain irregularities, resulting in an order for the licence to be revoked as well as investigations into the police inspector involved in the case at the time, Frans Micallef. The Commission had also ordered an investigation into how the Planning Area Permits Board (PAPB) had granted permission for the garage to be used for such work without an Officer in Charge report.
The Commission had asked for all licences for the garage to be revoked but the police had decided otherwise. Judge Michael Mallia, when the case was later heard in front of the Injustices Tribunal, described it as “a continuous injustice”. Judge Mallia had said that this act by the police was a deliberate act of contempt against the Commission. The Tribunal, after lambasting then Police Commissioner George Grech, could not provide any remedial legal alternatives, including the payment of damages in respect of costs incurred, due to the parameters of the same Injustices Law.
Recently, Frederick Attard, who lives on Ursuline Sisters Street, together with one of his neighbours, wrote a letter to the Ombudsman requesting an investigation into the change of licence application, from garage to a public service garage, in respect of 140 Ursuline Sisters Street, as well as the alleged use of a nearby garage for panel beating that did not have the necessary permits.
Mr Attard, speaking to this newspaper, expressed his worry that the granting of such a licence would result in even more inconvenience to the people living in the vicinity than already exists.
The letter to the Ombudsman read: “Kindly note that serious anomalies exist in the application submitted to Mepa by Clayton Mizzi to operate the public service garage on the premises No 140 named as ‘Statement Garage’ in Ursuline Sisters Street”.
Mr Attard told the Ombudsman: “I was denied the opportunity to submit my objection to Mepa regarding the application by Clayton Mizzi [to turn the garage into a public service garage] due to the simple fact that the primary mode of publication, that is the notice of this development, was never attached to the premises next door to my premises”.
The request to the Ombudsman mentioned that Anthony Mizzi, the father of Clayton Mizzi, had been illegally operating as a panel beater for many years from Garage No. 136, formerly known as Regency Car Hire. It mentions that this garage is not covered by a Panel Beater’s licence, but that No. 140, “where the same garage abusively licensed by the police” is. Mr Attard said that garage No. 140 was in fact the garage over which there was the panel beating licence controversy. The letter also states that Mr Brian Montebello, Director of the Commerce Department, is also investigating.
Regency Car Hire was already in operation on Ursuline Sisters Street in 1974, before the licence for Statesman Garage was issued in 1975. Later, a transfer of licence from Anthony Mizzi’s father Carmelo, to Anthony was granted for Statesman Garage, which then led to the police controversy.
He also notes that on the current Mepa application, in front of the Environment and Planning Commission, the name of the garage is given as ‘Statement Garage’, but the licence granted in 1975 shows ‘Statesman Garage’,
While the Mizzi’s architect (during the Mepa meeting earlier this week) said that the panel beating work was not carried out in the garage at 140, but rather in the other garage, which, according to Mr Attard, is not licensed for such work. The board deferred the case while the architect double-checks the name of the garage.
Speaking with this newsroom, Mr Attard explained that he had also had a meeting with the Commissioner for Environment and Planning at the Office of the Ombudsman David Pace, in which he was told that it would investigate the matter, depending on the conclusion of the application in front of the Environment and Planning Commission at Mepa.