Hunters: we’re a minority backed by over 100,000

The hunters’ association, FKNK, has told the Constitutional Court that a referendum to ban hunting in spring should not take place because Malta is ‘doubly’ obliged by the EU’s Birds Directive and the Bern Convention to both conserve the environment, and ensure that “other needs, amongst them, cultural and recreational” are respected.

In a 21-page application submitted by FKNK officials Joseph Perici Calascione and Lino Farrugia, the FKNK said the application was being made in the name of over 10,000 members, and insisted that a distinction be made between “hunting, legally exercised” and “the illegal killing of birds”, roundly condemning the killing of any protected species at any time of the year.

However, in spite of initially emphasising the many thousands of people in whose name the application is being submitted, and a later mention of a pro-hunting petition that it had organised garnering “more than 104,000 signatures”, it insists that hunters are a minority group that is entitled to protection.

“A referendum about an issue that affects an activity practised by a minority group could have serious repercussions and may also set a precedent on democratic issues… the governance by the majority must always be carried out in a manner that respects minorities.”

Other grounds argued by the federation for its objection to the proposed abrogative referendum include:

That the Referenda Act does not provide for the abrogation of an entire law, but only particular sections of it;

That the Coalition to Abolish Spring Hunting did not identify the referendum’s proponents, making it impossible for the court to identify whether the actual number of proponents are within the parameters laid down in the law (i.e. between 5 and 10 individuals), thereby rendering it invalid as a result;

That all the petition’s signatories did not personally fill in the field detailing from which electoral district they hailed, and that this was filled in by CASH members;

That the Electoral Commission “arbitrarily decided to verify the signatures using one sample” as opposed to the accepted “10% of remaining signatures, following an initial exercise of elimination”; and that it “certainly could not declare without doubt” the number of valid signatures, nor did it specify the methodology for verifying the signatures, or appoint an expert in forensic calligraphy;

That the Referenda Act does not apply to subsidiary legislation – which the spring hunting derogation forms part of.

The FKNK also said Malta’s derogation from the Birds Directive, which bans hunting in spring, was “derived from treaty obligations”, and that the Referenda Act specifically does not apply to “any legislation giving effect to any treaty obligation undertaken by Malta”.

The FKNK claims that the Birds Directive explicitly requires that the protection of species be balanced against other interests, and that therefore this balance will be disrupted “the moment the law implementing the spring hunting derogation is revoked”.

Making reference to the 2009 decision of the European Court of Justice, which green-lit a limited spring hunting season based on the autumn hunting catch, the FKNK said replacing the spring season with one in autumn would not be a satisfactory solution because, among other reasons, the non-protected species of migratory birds would only be found in a small part of the island and that, historically, the quantities caught were negligible.

It further quoted the Bern Convention, which requires that measures taken to conserve wild fauna “correspond, in particular to ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, while taking account of economic and recreational requirements and the needs of sub-species… at risk locally.”

The FKNK also referred to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights – another international agreement to which Malta is a signatory – which lists hunting as a “cultural activity”; and the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity also makes an appearance, further hammering home the ‘minority rights’ argument.

Arguing in favour of “proportionality between conservation of bird species and cultural and recreational requirements”, the FKNK warned that “there is a chance that this balance [of interests] may be seriously and irremediably prejudiced if… a referendum to abolish Spring hunting takes place.”

The application was signed by lawyer Kathleen Grima – from the firm Emanuel Mallia and Associates, the firm of home affairs minister Manuel Mallia – who is representing Lino Farrugia in a libel suit against MaltaToday over a newspaper cartoon.