[WATCH] Update 4 | EU court declares trapping in Malta illegal, but PN and hunters want new derogation

The European Court of Justice has ruled that Malta has failed to fulfil the conditions necessary to derogate from the EU’s ban on bird trapping.

The decision has effectively spelt out the illegality of allowing bird trapping in Malta after it was legalised by the Labour government, years after the practice was banned.

The Birds Directive bans trapping of birds but allows it only on very specific conditions.

“Malta has not adduced evidence that the derogation at issue is used under strictly supervised conditions within the meaning of the Directive. It considers that in the context of Malta, characterised by a very high density of licence holders, namely over 4,000, and of registered trapping stations, namely over 6,400, the fact that merely 23% of hunters have been subject to individual checks seems inadequate.

“Evidence shows that failure to observe the restrictions relating to authorised catch periods and locations, in particular by trapping inside ‘Natura 2000’ sites, has been rather frequent during the 2014 autumn capturing season,” the ECJ said.

In today’s judgment, the Court ruled that the 2014 and 2015 derogation for finch trapping did not comply with EU law, “since they do not contain any reference to the absence of another satisfactory solution.”

It said Malta had not complied with the condition of the Directive according to which the permitted derogation must concern only ‘small numbers’ of birds. “The Court states that the condition relating to trapping in ‘small numbers’ cannot be met if the trapping of birds authorised by way of derogation does not ensure the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a satisfactory level. The Court considers that Malta has not adduced sufficient evidence to show that that condition is met.”

It referred to a 2007 study by BirdLife Malta which states that trapping in Malta is so intensive that only a handful of each of the common finch species regularly breed on the islands, whereas they breed in high numbers in other areas of the Mediterranean.

“Even though Malta claims to have taken into account only reference populations from countries with stable or increasing populations, Malta’s selection of those populations has not always been consistent with the stated methodology. It is thus apparent from the Maltese authorities’ technical memoranda that those authorities took into account, for the purpose of the 2015 autumn capturing season, reference populations in decline or whose conservation status was not known,” the court said.

The ECJ added that when this condition to trap in small numbers is met, “recreational trapping of birds cannot be considered judicious.”

Not even the condition for selective live-capturing of finches was met, especially after the Maltese authorities admitted the existence of ‘by-catch’.

Government reaction

In a first reaction, the Maltese governmnet said it was evaluating the decision carefully and studying the outcome of the court’s ruling, which cannot be appealed.

“In the last years the government has done whatever was possible to allow bird trapping to take place, opening the seasons from 2014 to 2017. The government dedicated all resources possible to defend its case together with hunting organisations, who together presented their case to the court to keep this tradition in place.”

AD welcomes ruling

The ruling was welcomed by Alternattiva Demokratika, which said the decision afforded more protection to Malta's natural environment, flora and fauna.

AD rural affairs spokesperson Simon Galea accused government of taking trappers for a ride by "peddling the myth" that trapping could continue unabated.

"Fortunately for those who love their country and its natural environment, the ECJ has confirmed what we knew all along: trapping is illegal. It is now government's duty to see that trapping is not allowed through proper and effective enforcement," Galea said.

Hunters' lobby reaction

In a statement, the hunters' federation FKNK said the ECJ sentence did not take away Malta's right to "correctly" apply a derogation from the ban on trapping. "We are going to insist with the Maltese government to start discussions with the European Commission to address the shortcomings pointed out by the ECJ so that Malta can apply a new derogation in October in conformity with the Birds Directive, so that we avoid wastage of time, court cases and expense. If this does not happen, Malta would not be a member of the same EU as other member states," FKNK president Joseph Perici Calascione said.

Hunting organisation St Hubert Hunters (KSU) has laid the blame for the ECJ ruling on finch trapping on BirdLife Malta's "alarmist arguments". The organisation said the court based its reasoning on "blatant manipulation of fact" and its verdict did not reflect the reality of a controlled and limited practice to trap finches.

"KSU will use all means at its disposal to analyse the verdict in repect of any issues noted by the court and in line with its purpose to defend our practices will act accordingly," the statement said.

Nationalist Party reaction

The PN said that thousands of trappers would not be able to practice their hobby because of bad decisions taken by the government. It said that despite its promises, the government had not satisfied the conditions for a derogation from the Birds Directive.

"The government created a system with a number of birds per trapper, a system that was devised without consultation," said the PN. "This is because it was devised with no long term plan in mind and in a careless manner that completely ignored reports on the bird populations in Malta. The government said that 27,000 birds would be caught but issued 40,000 licenses."

The PN said that now that the the decision had been made, the PN was once again appealing for serious dialogue with the European Commission and with trappers in order to find a way of sustainably maintaining trapping in a way that doesn't go against the provisions of the Birds Directive.

Government to decide on course of action in the coming days

The government will be deciding on a course of action following the ECJ's verdict in the coming days, Parliamentary Secretary for Animal Rights Clint Camilleri said.

"The government is in the process of analysing the verdict in detail, in order to arrive to a decision in the coming days," he said.​

Stressing that the government did not do anything illegal in applying the derogation, Camilleri said that the government cannot take a decision before an accurate analysis of the verdict is complete.