A Court injunction to stop a fireworks display in Birżebbuġa may have been the opening salvo in a fight that seems to be brewing between fireworks enthusiasts and agricultural landowners.

Over the weekend, Malta was host to a legal drama as Birżebbuġa’s Għaqda tan-Nar 22 ta’ Frar was barred from letting off its aerial fireworks by a Court injunction filed at the 11th hour by nearby landowners.

Prime Minister Robert Abela and Minister Miriam Dalli intervened to secure an alternative site from which a limited display was permitted, but this was not enough to cool down the temper of those outraged by what was perceived as a threat to Malta’s traditions.

Among the expressions of solidarity and consternation about the precedent that may be set were several calls on pyrotechnics enthusiasts to report any illegalities taking place in fields close to those from which fireworks are let off.

“Illegal rooms, stables, structures, storage rooms. If there’s no planning permit, report and apply pressure to follow it up,” said one anonymous Facebook user in a post that has since been removed.

“Every club knows some architect or lawyer who can guide them through the enforcement process,” they said. “It’s not right that they commit illegalities in fields and the pyrotechnic clubs get the blame.”

Such calls seem to be a reaction to claims of damages worth over €100,000 by the landowners involved in the Birżebbuġa case. The costings provided seem to be related to a fire – allegedly caused by fireworks that exploded early, before reaching the necessary height – in a rubbish truck.

However, the rubbish truck in question was apparently being stored, commenters pointed out, without a permit: “A field is not a scrapyard. All that junk he [the claimant] had should not have been there.”

Photos obtained by TVM

Another commenter expressed their view: “From a field it becomes a scrapyard with weeds and dirt and rubbish. Then once it catches fire everyone tries to turn it to their benefit, and the ones who suffer are those in the pyrotechnics club that spends all year making sacrifices.”

Concerns about the encroachment of development were widespread. One poster argued: “It’s time that us fireworks enthusiasts object to every type of development close to our spaces. From a field full of trash they build a room, then a pool, and in no time it becomes an entertainment venue.”

They continued: “It’s not right that after our fireworks factories had been in a place for years, developers wearing the mask of environmentalists come to stop us. I won’t stand for it. If I see a permit for development nearby I’m going to object.”

Other commenters, responding to criticism of the Court, pointed out that it has no say on the permits being issued for new buildings and the sanctioning of illegal ones, or pointed to the case of Nigret, in Żurrieq, where a controversial apartment block was recently approved on arable land despite receiving over 400 objections.

Not everyone agreed with fighting back against illegalities and encroaching developments, however, with several arguing that such an approach would simply escalate tensions.

“The more we fight the worse things will get.”