BusinessToday Previous Editions

3 NEWS 27.7.2023 Site management through Whatsapp and workers with no training in construction SOFIA DEATH MAGISTERIAL INQUIRY FROM PAGE 1 e inquiry said the design failed to consider aspects such as wall stabili- ty or building resilience to prevent a catastrophic collapse in the case of an accident. e wall configurations and wide openings on two sides meant that the taller wall on the side of the building was structurally weak. Five people have since been charged with the involuntary homicide of Jean Paul Sofia, who died after the building collapsed on 3 December 2022. e accused are: Matthew Schem- bri, 38, company director, from Birkirkara; Kurt Buhagiar, 39, em- ployee from Naxxar; Adriana Zam- mit, 35 from Zabbar, architect; Mi- lomir Jovicevic, 39, a construction worker and his wife Dijana, 39, with him a director in Milmar Construc- tion Ltd. e five were accused of causing the death of Jean Paul Sofia and in- jury to five other workers, now iden- tified as Vladimir Laketic, Gentjan Carku, Lulzim Carku, Denis Carku, and Sammy David Curtis; and neg- ligently causing a grievous injury to the five workers. The nature of the collapse e inquiry conclusions suggest that the wall of the construction site fell moments before the roof started to collapse. "is is in conformity with the hypothesis that the collapse was not an internal one, from the roof, because otherwise the fresh concrete would have collapsed to- wards the middle." Photos presented in the inquiry suggest that the building collapsed outwards, rather than inwards. Another photo shows that the planned double walls were not tied together, as required in good work- manship. "is shortcoming has structural significance, because, in terms of lateral stiffness, a dou- ble wall tied together is four times stronger than two walls built next to each other." More photos show that the met- al bars over which concerete is laid were neither tied to the respective adjacent structures, thus reducing the building's 'resilience' in the case of an accident. e inquiry also points to a spread- er beam mentioned in the construc- tion plans drawn up by the architect. However, what was missing were in- structions for the spreader beam to be tied to the metal bars between the concrete planks. Since the outside structure was not 'tied' together properly, pressure from the overlying concrete planks would have pushed the walls out- wards. e fact that there was no inter- locking system tying the walls to oth- er parts of the structure meant that the moment one wall started to col- lapse, the whole site was going to go down with it. No one licensed on site e inquiry points out that there was no one on site who fully under- stood what they were doing, and the contractors and owners of the site knew this. "It is important that the authorities impose not only a licensing system of contractors as soon as possible, for both Maltese and foreign workers, but also serious training on the cur- rent needs of the construction indus- try." Moreover, no register was kept of who was going onto the construction site. e inquiry adds that Jean Paul Sofia's role on site was also vague, as earlier in the day he went on site to collect material and empty it into a skip. He later returned to the con- struction site and this time went up to the roof, where he took photos of the work underway. "It is fundamental for the health and safety of people, including workers, that on any construction site there is full control over who enters the site, and that there is someone who knows exactly who is working on what, as is the norm outside of Malta." Some of the workers who were on site at the time of the collapse had lit- tle to no training in construction, and were registered as carpenters. It seems that Matthew Schembri was the person giving instruction on the work that had to be done on site. "e technical leadership on site, and supervision, was done through WhatsApp and photos taken by someone like Jean Paul Sofia!" Indeed, architect Adriana Zam- mit was giving orders on what to do on site based on photos sent on a WhatsApp chat with Matthew Schembri, Kurt Buhagiar, and at a later stage Schembri's cousin Andre. Zammit and Schembri would only meet on site every two weeks. According to the inquiry report, it was Kurt Buhagiar who was respon- sible for the applications and permits for the site, "because of his contacts". OHSA were not aware of works OHSA CEO Mark Gauci testified to the inquiry that the owners of the site did not inform the authority of the works, as is required at law. Because of this, the work was not on the OHSA's radar. No officials from the authority went on site to carry out inspections, nor to ensure that the site is safe for workers. In fact, photos exhibited in the in- quiry from various mobiles and files never showed workers on site wear- ing protective gear. ADRIANA Zammit, the architect be- ing charged in relation to the death of Jean Paul Sofia, transferred "a substan- tial amount of money and property" to third parties one month after the fatal incident, the magisterial inquiry found. Magistrate Marse-Anne Farrugia made reference to WhatsApp chats between Zammit and a certain "Christian" from 3 January 2023 onwards, a month after the fatal incident. e chats indicate that the architect started transferring unspeci- fied but "substantial" sums of money and immovable property to third parties. Additionally, the chats are said to in- dicate that Zammit, "started to see how she was going to dispose of her money." is alone does not constitute a crime according to the magisterial inquiry, however, it was noted that this fact could be relevant in the future, in the eventual- ity that Zammit's creditors come knock- ing for their dues. e inquiry notes that in the future, this behaviour could be investigated since Zammit's efforts to transfer per- sonal assets could indicate plans to com- mit fraud. Architect of doomed building transferred personal assets to third parties after Sofia tragedy Architect Adriana Zammit JAMES DEBONO THE fast-tracked planning procedure for the construction of factories in industrial sites is de- scribed as an "institutional choice" which creates a perception that few controls are required. e observation is made in the magisterial in- quiry into the death of Jean Paul Sofia in Kordin on 3 December. "[It] strengthens the perception that there is no need for many controls in the construction of fac- tories where many people are employed," the court expert observed. e Planning Authority (PA) is not responsible for the safety aspect which falls under the scrutiny of the Building and Construction Authority but the inquiry suggests that the fast-track procedure contributes to laxity in the sector. Factories in State-owned industrial estates do not need a full PA permit but are approved through a notification system in a shorter timeframe, and in the absence of public hearings and a case officer report. According to this procedure instead of apply- ing for a permit, developers are obliged to notify the Authority prior to the commencement of any work. In the Kordin factory case the development was originally approved in April 2020, less than a month after the notification was presented. Another DNO permit was issued in June 2022 to sanction alterations made at basement and ground floor level as well as for the addition of a third and fourth floor. Clearance letters from the Civil Protection Department and INDIS were pre- sented before the permit was issued. e inquiry also identifies other institutional shortcomings including the absence of any inspec- tion by the Building and Construction Authority during the two and a half years of construction. Testifying in front of the inquiry, BCA official Sean Mizzi attributed this to a "lack of resources". Moreover, since the development does not abut on any third party, there was no requirement for the developer to insure the building. e development notification system for indus- trial sites meant to encourage enterprise and re- duce bureaucracy pre-dates the present adminis- tration and is applicable to all sites "administered by INDIS Malta Ltd and Malta Enterprise zones". e DNO system was recently amended to allow the approval of developments higher than 15m in specific areas like Mrieħel and San Ġwann. Magistrate questions fast track permitting for factories

• Cover