Malta should halt ACTA ratification process – Pullicino Orlando

Malta should emulate Poland, the Czech Republic and Latvia and stop the ratification of the controversial Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement treaty, government MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando said yesterday.

Pullicino Orlando, who is also the chairman of the Malta Council for Science and Technology, was replying to questions by MaltaToday. He said that the Polish government has already announced that it has halted the ACTA ratification process as it "had made insufficient consultations before signing the agreement in late January, and it was necessary to ensure it was entirely safe for Polish citizens".

Pullicino Orlando added that The Czech Republic, Latvia and non-signatories Germany and Slovakia have indicated that they have also stopped the ratification process. "I feel that Malta should also stop the process of ratification until we can ensure that all the necessary legal safeguards to protect freedom of expression and the right to privacy are in place."

ACTA has been the subject of controversy both locally and abroad in recent weeks. In Malta, a group of NGOs got together to protest against the treaty after it transpired that the government had signed the agreement along with 22 other EU member states. 

The issue was the subject of a well attended protest on Saturday, organised by the Malta Anti-ACTA Group and attended by a number of organisations, including the Malta Linux User Group, Moviment Graffitti, Front Kontra ċ-Censura, Kunsill Studenti Junior College, Malta Alliance for Freedom, Malta Humanist Association, Ir-Realtá Collective, MOVE Progressive Students, Alternattiva Demokratika Żgħażagh, Forum Żgħażagħ Laburisti and Pulse.

In reaction, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi declared that while the government recognises the ongoing debate on ACTA as well as the need to protect authors' rights and intellectual property, he was not in favour of any measures that could potentially suffocate citizens' rights to acquire, share or communicate information.

Gonzi announced that he has instructed lawmakers to prepare a draft legislation aimed at "strengthening the fundamental principles of people's right to information and expression through information technology".

ACTA will supposedly be debated in the European Parliament in June. However, it looks like European governments are slowing down the process to ratify. This could well mean that the debate will be held in 2013.

Ratification at a national level will only happen once the treaty is approved by the European Parliament. During a debate on ACTA held at University last week, Nationalist MEP Simon Busuttil said that if the European Parliament will vote against ACTA, the act will be "dead".

Martin Schulz of the Party of European Socialists - currently head of the European Parliament - has voiced his opposition to ACTA.

Speaking to German TV last Sunday, Schulz said that the agreement lacks balance between protecting copyright and protecting the rights of internet users.

Although countries can individually enforce the agreement, the EU will need to play a role if the treaty is to be effective in enforcing intellectual property protection across several countries.

Germany said that it would hold off on backing the agreement until further discussion on the treaty is held.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk also said that his country would wait for "sufficient consultation" before ratifying it.

Meanwhile, Slovenia's ambassador to Japan, Helena Drnovsek Zorko, apologised for what she called her "carelessness" in signing the treaty on behalf of her country in Japan.

Arguments for...

• ACTA rightly recognises the value of intellectual property rights in the context of global competitiveness.
• The pro-ACTA camp believes ACTA will clamp down on counterfeit goods, generic medicines and internet copyright infringement.
• They hope that these valuable industries will be protected and will allow companies to recoup revenues lost to counterfeiting.

Arguments against...

• It is undemocratic. ACTA has been negotiated behind closed doors and only covers the interests of big businesses.
• It blurs the lines between piracy and counterfeiting.
• It criminalises copyright infringement when sanctions already exist in national laws.
• It creates a barrier to changing national law. Democratic governments will lose the right to decide their own copyright policy or patent policy.
• It could hinder developing countries' ability to decide on policies which best suit their domestic priorities. Particular areas of concern include the crack down on generic drugs and making food patents from multinationals.
• It stipulates a penalty regime which is unrealistic, and weighted heavily in favour of industry.