From Prof. I. Refalo

I am instructed by the owners of Ta’ Cenc to reply to the letter written by Oisin James-Dillon with the above title, (TMIS 12 November). Though claiming to defend the rule of law it is evident that your correspondent’s notions on the matter are to say the least confusing.

The rule of law is the principle that governmental authority is legitimately exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedure. The principle is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary governance. It implies among other things that we are all subject to the law. It is a recognition that we are all free human beings and that this freedom is safeguarded by universal adherence of the law. It implies the respect of the rights of other persons, including the right to private property. The right to private property, is sanctioned by the Constitution of Malta and is indeed one of the pillars on which the Maltese legal system is built. Private property was already recognised at the time that the 1802 declaration was made. Indeed, one of the reasons for making this declaration was to ensure protection of Maltese property from the depredations of foreigners. The right to private property is thus sanctioned by the rule of law.

Happily, the situation today is that the right to private property is protected by law. The right to private property is in fact entrenched in the Maltese Constitution as a fundamental human right, together with other rights such as the right to privacy. Your correspondent should note that at law unauthorised trespass on private land is a crime and the perpetrators of crime are called criminals.

It is not clear whether your correspondent is challenging the right to private property in general. What is certain is that he expects to be able to invade other

people’s property on a whim whenever it takes his fancy to do so. The danger inherent in this position is self- evident. Perhaps I may want to swim in my

neighbour’s pool or park in his drive. Unless allowed by the owner, I am not entitled to do so. Should I

persist nonetheless, I will be in breach of the law and liable to answer accordingly. This point seems not to have been understood by your self-styled champion of liberty. His ideas on the matter have more to do with the rule of the jungle than with the rule of law.

My clients will always take all those precautions,

which, according to law, will allow them to safeguard and enjoy their property in full respect of the rule of law.

Ian Refalo

Valletta