BirdLife Malta objects to proposed reductions in penalties for illegal hunting offences

BirdLife Malta has raised strong objections to proposed changes that would reduce penalties for offences involving the illegal killing of protected birds, arguing that the move could weaken the enforcement of Malta’s conservation laws.

Speaking outside Castille, BirdLife Malta Head of Conservation Nicholas Barbara gave an overview of several incidents reported by the organisation in recent weeks involving hunters allegedly breaking hunting regulations and protected birds being shot.

Barbara also outlined discussions on penalties that have taken place within the ORNIS Committee. The issue included legal work commissioned from lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and David Chetcuti Dimech. During a meeting held on Wednesday, the latter presented a number of proposed amendments to the existing penalties, with BirdLife Malta raising several objections.

One of the proposals under consideration would reduce the fine for killing a stork from €5,000 to €3,000.

BirdLife Malta President Darryl Grima questioned who would benefit from reducing penalties for offences under the conservation regulations.

“One of the most fundamental points in this discussion is to identify who would actually benefit if penalties for breaking the law are reduced,” Grima said.

He argued that reducing penalties would not benefit people who comply with the law, but rather those who commit offences.

BirdLife Malta also challenged comparisons between hunting-related penalties and fines imposed for traffic offences and other contraventions, arguing that such offences are not directly comparable.

“If the government wants to conduct a serious assessment of proportionality, it should compare laws with similar objectives, including the Animal Welfare Act,” Grima said.

BirdLife Malta CEO Mark Sultana said the debate should start with the purpose of the legislation itself.

He pointed to the name of the legislation – the Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations – arguing that its primary purpose is the conservation and protection of wild birds.

“Hunting is a regulated activity within this conservation framework; the law does not primarily exist to facilitate hunting,” Sultana said.

He warned that reducing penalties could send the message that protected animals can be killed without sufficiently serious consequences.

BirdLife Malta also criticised proposals relating to the reinstatement of hunting licences revoked because of rule-breaking. The organisation said it did not agree with hunters having licences returned without proper justification, referring to a proposal made by the government during the election campaign.

Head of Public Engagement Antonia Micallef and Grima called on the government to publish the evidence supporting any conclusion that existing penalties are disproportionate.

BirdLife Malta is also demanding a transparent assessment of the proportionality of the penalties, using comparisons with legislation that has similar objectives, particularly the Animal Welfare Act, rather than offences that the organisation considers fundamentally different in nature and purpose.

The conservation organisation described the proposed changes as “an attack on environmental justice” and said it would continue to oppose them.

 

RSS Feed Source: Independent Malta BirdLife Malta objects to proposed reductions in penalties for illegal hunting offences