Gianpula’s massive illegalities slated for sanctioning against €50,000 fine

What began as a rural farmhouse surrounded by agricultural fields more than half a century ago is now on the verge of being officially rubber-stamped as one of Malta’s largest entertainment complexes, despite decades of illegal development, abuse of laws, impunity and strong objections from the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA).

The Planning Authority is recommending the approval of an application by Gianpula owner Roger De Giorgio to sanction a vast array of illegal structures and alterations spread across some 33,350 square metres of agricultural land outside the development zone (ODZ) in Żebbuġ.

In return, the owner would be required to pay a sanctioning fine of just €50,000.

The recommendation marks a dramatic turnaround after years of failed attempts by De Giorgio to regularise the sprawling entertainment village, which has gradually expanded from a modest farmhouse first licensed in the early 1970s into one of Malta’s biggest nightlife destinations.

The proposed sanctioning covers almost 9,700 square metres of illegal entertainment areas and ancillary facilities, including bars, kitchens, swimming pools, ticket booths, seating areas, kiosks, paved open spaces, sanitary facilities, staircases, planters and structural alterations carried out over several decades.

The application also seeks to sanction the conversion of the original farmhouse into an entertainment venue, together with extensive interventions throughout the Gianpula complex. According to the Planning Authority’s case officer, aerial photographs dating back to 1978 and 1994 show that numerous additions and alterations had already taken place by then, while the business continued to expand over the following years.

De Giorgio has longstanding political and media connections. A former Nationalist Party official, he also co-owns MediaToday, the publisher of MaltaToday and Illum, through his family company Elvaston Ltd, alongside Saviour Balzan.

Over five decades, he transformed what was once a rural farmhouse into what has effectively become an entertainment village attracting thousands of patrons every weekend during the summer months, drawing complaints from residents in surrounding localities due to the loud noise, which have been ignored.

The recommendation comes despite a strongly worded objection from the ERA, which warned that the development had caused ‘significant environmental impacts’ through excessive land take-up, hard landscaping and the proliferation of built structures in a rural area.

The environmental regulator said the development had resulted in noise and light pollution, environmental degradation and the intensification of commercial activity outside the development zone (ODZ).

In unusually blunt language, ERA also criticised what it described as the practice of developers building illegally first and later expecting the authorities to legitimise the abuse.

‘The malpractice of first developing a site irrespective of its ODZ status and subsequently expecting the regulatory authorities to retroactively rubber-stamp a fait accompli is objectionable in principle,’ ERA stated while recommending outright refusal of the application.

The Superintendence of Cultural Heritage also raised serious concerns, confirming that extensive unauthorised works had caused irreversible damage to the historic farmhouse and the underground catacombs beneath the site.

Even the Planning Authority’s own transport consultants initially described the traffic situation generated by Gianpula as ‘chaotic and hazardous’, highlighting congestion, illegal manoeuvres, pedestrian safety risks and inadequate access. The proposal only became acceptable after mitigation measures and revised traffic arrangements were submitted.

The recommendation is particularly striking given the site’s long enforcement history.

In 2021, the Planning Authority issued an enforcement notice against De Giorgio ordering the removal of an illegal car park constructed on agricultural land together with a series of unauthorised interventions, including land levelling, the demolition of rural boundary walls, illegal access roads, containers and other structures. Earlier attempts to sanction those works had been refused after the Authority, which concluded that the development had caused unacceptable damage to agricultural land.

The latest case officer nonetheless concluded that because Gianpula has operated under police and trading licences for many years, and because the proposed interventions are considered ancillary to an existing entertainment use, the development is acceptable in principle and should be sanctioned upon payment of the administrative fine.