NGOs vow to continue legal fight to protect Comino

Malta’s leading environmental organisations have pledged to continue their campaign to protect the island of Comino after the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) rejected an appeal against a controversial development proposal by the Hili Group. The decision, described by NGOs as a “predictable rejection,” has reignited concerns about the future of one of Malta’s most ecologically valuable and unspoiled natural reserves.

Earlier this year, the Planning Authority (PA) approved a major project consisting of a 140-bed luxury hotel, 16 private villas, and 44 swimming pools on Comino. The proposal sparked widespread outrage among environmentalists, residents, and the general public, who argued that such an extensive development would permanently alter the island’s delicate ecological balance.

Environmentalists have long warned that if this project proceeds, it could lead to the irreversible loss of Comino as a natural sanctuary. Once known for its tranquility, biodiversity, and untouched coastal landscapes, the island now faces the risk of being transformed into a high-end tourism destination, dominated by concrete structures and private leisure facilities.

Legal challenge and environmental impact concerns

The appeal to the EPRT was lodged earlier this year by ten non-governmental organisations and several concerned individuals. The appellants argued that the proposed development breaches Malta’s Local Plan and several planning policies that expressly designate Comino as a protected nature reserve. These policies prohibit any new construction or intensified development that would compromise the island’s environmental integrity.

The appellants further pointed to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which clearly highlighted that the proposed project would have “significant negative effects” on Comino’s habitats and ecological integrity. Despite these warnings, the Planning Authority granted its approval, prompting the coalition of NGOs to pursue the matter legally.

However, the EPRT’s ruling sided with the Planning Authority, acknowledging that the project would encroach on natural land but still concluding that the PA’s decision was lawful. This outcome has been met with strong criticism from environmental groups, who argue that the ruling undermines the purpose of environmental protection laws and sets a dangerous precedent for future developments on protected sites.

NGOs reaffirm commitment to continue the legal fight

In a joint statement issued after the tribunal’s ruling, the NGOs reaffirmed their commitment to continue the fight “to save Comino from greed.” They emphasized that the decision represents only one phase in an ongoing legal battle to safeguard Malta’s natural heritage.

“Thankfully, the legal battle to save Comino from greed will continue,” the organisations declared, announcing that further legal action is being prepared. “The next steps will be announced in the coming weeks.”

The NGOs expressed their gratitude to the Maltese public, whose financial support through crowdfunding campaigns made it possible to mount the legal challenge. These campaigns have drawn hundreds of contributions, reflecting strong national sentiment against large-scale developments on protected natural sites.

Public support and growing environmental awareness

The controversy surrounding Comino has galvanized widespread public attention, turning the island into a symbol of the growing tension between economic development and environmental preservation in Malta. Social media campaigns, protests, and public petitions have amplified calls for the government to reconsider its development policies on protected land.

Comino, a small island located between Malta and Gozo, is a Natura 2000 site — a designation under European Union law that recognizes areas of high ecological value. Its Blue Lagoon and surrounding habitats are home to several protected species of flora and fauna. Environmentalists argue that the construction of luxury hotels and villas would not only destroy natural habitats but also strain limited resources such as water and waste management systems.

Activists have also warned that increasing tourist density could overwhelm the island’s small size and fragile ecosystems. Even before the proposed development, concerns had been raised about overcrowding during the summer months, with thousands of day-trippers visiting the Blue Lagoon daily.

The development proposal and its implications

The project put forward by the Hili Group envisions transforming the site of an existing derelict hotel into a modern luxury resort. While the developers have argued that the plan would replace an outdated structure with a more sustainable, eco-friendly facility, environmental groups remain unconvinced.

Critics note that the scale of the proposal — including 44 swimming pools and multiple private villas — contradicts claims of environmental sustainability. They argue that such amenities would require extensive infrastructure, including desalination, sewage, and waste management systems, that could further harm the environment.

The NGOs have also raised concerns about transparency in the approval process, suggesting that the Planning Authority’s decision ignored expert advice and failed to adequately consider the cumulative environmental impact.

Legal and policy questions surrounding Comino’s status

Comino’s legal status as a nature reserve has been at the heart of the dispute. The island is protected under both national and EU environmental regulations, which classify it as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and a Special Protection Area (SPA). These designations are meant to restrict development and ensure the long-term preservation of habitats and species.

The appellants argued that the Hili Group’s project is incompatible with these protections, citing specific provisions in Malta’s Local Plan that prohibit new buildings on Comino outside the designated development zone. The Planning Authority, however, interpreted the existing hotel site as a permissible redevelopment area, a position the tribunal accepted.

Legal experts observing the case have suggested that the ruling could have broader implications for how Malta interprets redevelopment clauses within protected zones. If upheld, it may open the door for similar large-scale projects on sites that were originally developed before the introduction of stricter environmental regulations.

NGOs behind the legal appeal

The appeal was filed by ten prominent NGOs alongside individual appellants. The organisations include:

• Azzjoni: Tuna Artna Lura
• BirdLife Malta
• Din l-Art Ħelwa
• Friends of the Earth Malta
• Għawdix
• Moviment Graffitti
• Nature Trust – FEE Malta
• Ramblers Association
• The Archaeological Society Malta
• Wirt Għawdex

Together, these groups form one of the most significant environmental coalitions in Malta’s history, uniting heritage, ecological, and civil rights organisations under a common cause.

What happens next

While the tribunal’s rejection marks a legal setback, environmentalists remain determined to pursue all available legal channels. The NGOs have indicated their intention to explore further judicial options, including the possibility of appealing the tribunal’s decision in the Maltese courts or through European institutions.

The case could potentially escalate to the European Court of Justice if it is determined that the project violates EU environmental directives. Such proceedings, however, are complex and time-consuming, and NGOs are now working closely with legal experts to assess their strategy.

In the meantime, campaigners are urging the Maltese government to take proactive measures to ensure stronger enforcement of environmental protection laws. They have called for an immediate review of planning policies affecting Comino and other Natura 2000 sites, emphasizing that legal frameworks must not be weakened to accommodate private interests.

Broader implications for Malta’s environmental policy

The Comino controversy underscores a larger debate over Malta’s approach to sustainable development. Over the past decade, rapid construction and tourism expansion have led to widespread criticism that the country’s natural and cultural heritage is being sacrificed for short-term economic gain.

The case has also renewed calls for greater public participation in environmental decision-making. NGOs have repeatedly stressed that Malta’s planning system should not merely balance economic growth and environmental protection but should place the protection of natural assets at its core.

For many environmental advocates, the struggle to save Comino is not just about one island — it is a reflection of Malta’s broader environmental future. Whether the island remains a pristine sanctuary or becomes another luxury resort will signal the country’s priorities for years to come.

Conclusion

The legal and environmental struggle over Comino represents far more than a dispute about one development project — it is a defining moment for Malta’s approach to environmental stewardship and responsible governance. The rejection of the NGOs’ appeal by the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal has, in many ways, exposed the fragile balance between economic ambition and the preservation of national heritage. Yet, rather than deterring environmental advocates, the ruling has strengthened their resolve to defend one of Malta’s last unspoiled sanctuaries.

The coalition of NGOs and citizens behind this campaign has demonstrated that public concern for environmental protection is both deep and enduring. Through crowdfunding, public mobilization, and persistent advocacy, they have brought Comino’s plight to the forefront of national consciousness. Their commitment sends a clear message — that Malta’s natural landscapes are not commodities to be traded for profit, but vital parts of the nation’s identity and ecological legacy.

As the legal process continues, the outcome of the Comino case will likely shape the future of Malta’s planning and conservation policies. It will test the country’s willingness to uphold its environmental obligations, both under domestic law and European directives. Whether the next stages take place in Maltese courts or within European institutions, the case has already underscored the urgent need for greater accountability, transparency, and respect for the environment in national decision-making.

In the end, the fight to save Comino is about more than protecting an island — it is about affirming a collective responsibility to preserve Malta’s natural heritage for future generations. The road ahead may be long and challenging, but the determination of those defending Comino suggests that this fight is far from over.

FAQs

What is the Comino development project?
It is a proposal by the Hili Group to build a luxury resort with a 140-bed hotel, 16 villas, and 44 swimming pools on the island of Comino.

Why is the project controversial?
Environmentalists argue that it threatens Comino’s fragile ecosystems and violates planning policies that protect it as a nature reserve.

Who approved the project?
The Planning Authority granted approval earlier this year despite environmental impact warnings.

What did the Environmental Impact Assessment find?
The EIA identified significant negative effects on Comino’s habitats and ecological balance.

Who filed the appeal against the project?
Ten NGOs and several individuals filed an appeal before the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal.

What did the tribunal decide?
The EPRT upheld the Planning Authority’s decision, rejecting the NGOs’ appeal.

What are the NGOs planning to do next?
They intend to continue legal proceedings and explore further national and European legal avenues.

Why is Comino considered environmentally significant?
Comino is a Natura 2000 site, home to rare species and protected under EU conservation laws.

What role did public donations play?
Crowdfunding enabled the NGOs to fund legal representation and pursue the appeal.

Could this case affect future development in Malta?
Yes. The ruling could influence how Malta interprets redevelopment rights in protected zones, affecting future environmental cases.