Reacting to the decision reached by the EU executive on Wednesday to expand the Birds Directive infringement proceedings against Malta, the government yesterday reiterated its position that it had acted in line with the “understandings” it had reached with the EU during Malta’s EU accession negotiations.
In a statement issued yesterday evening, the government added that it “regrets that the Commission has decided to act as if the subject was never even discussed during these (accession) negotiations”.
The government added that it is still to receive a communication of the decision, and that it will be replying to the Commission’s decision once it is in hand.
The government also appears to have doubts over the legal precedent of a possible case against Malta in the European Court of Justice (ECJ), explaining that while it is aware the Commission “considers itself constrained by the decision of the ECJ in Case 344/03 (Commission v Finland), the facts of which do not necessarily find a parallel in Malta’s case, it recalls that, while the decision on which the Court is relying was delivered on 15 December 2005, the Commission has initiated proceedings in relation to the derogation utilised by Malta for the period 1-22 May 2004”.
Late Wednesday evening, the EU executive announced it had expanded the scope of the Birds Directive infringement proceedings against Malta from its previous focus on the allowance of spring hunting in 2004 to all the years between and including 2004 and 2007. The aim appears to provide a complete, documented picture of its complaint against Malta should the case end up before the ECJ. The development appears to be more a question of when rather than if, given the unrelenting and opposing standpoints adopted by the government and the Commission.
The EU has also given Malta one month in which to reply to charges that it has been disregarding the Birds Directive since accession. The one-month time-frame is half the time usually allowed for responses from governments, and most likely takes into consideration the fact that Malta is still to reply to its original warning letter issued by the Commission in July of last year.
Commenting on the ever-developing situation, BirdLife Malta yesterday urged the government to take the visit of an EU delegation at the end of the month as an opportunity to retract its decision on spring hunting.
Failure to do so, BirdLife added, would result in Malta being brought before the ECJ much sooner than it had anticipated, as evidenced by the EU executive’s decision to issue a supplementary warning letter. The supplementary letter will ask Malta to justify its stance in allowing spring hunting since spring 2004.
Commenting yesterday, BirdLife Malta president Joseph Mangion said, “It is irresponsible for a government to steer the country towards certain failure. This last formal letter is a clear indication of the frustration in Brussels. It has also made it clear that by widening its legal action to cover four years of illegal hunting, it is preparing a strong case before the ECJ.”
The NGO added there is no justification on legal or scientific grounds for the government’s decision to appease the hunters for a fourth consecutive year since Malta joined the EU.
“Now is the time for the government to stop burying its head in the sand and come out to face reality,” BirdLife added.