Carmel Cacopardo, a spokesman for the Campaign for the abolition of spring hunting (CASH), insisted today that the fact that the campaigners were carrying IVA/YES placards on Friday related to the approval by the Constitutional Court for their application for the referendum to be held.

He was commenting on TVM after questions were raised in a press conference by the prime minister on Saturday on the wording of the spring hunting referendum.

Dr Muscat had said the referendum question would be based on the petition made for the holding of the referendum. The petition had asked whether the dispositions of the law (on spring hunting) should continue to remain in force. On the other hand, this was an abrogative referendum - to strike down a law. A process was therefore under way to ensure that the question was in line with the petition and conformed with the law. It is therefore not yet clear whether people would need to vote yes or no to abolish or retain spring hunting.

Sources told Times of Malta yesterday the government has already been advised by one legal expert, who felt the referendum should ask whether the electorate wants to retain the law.

The Attorney General is expected to give his opinion today. The sources said preliminary discussions had already indicated this advice would likely tally with that already expressed.

Mr Cacopardo said the Campaign against spring hunting had expected the referendum to be held in June especially as April 11 was just a few days after Easter and before this year’s Spring season.

Lino Farrugia, CEO of the FKNK, reiterated the view that this was not a referendum on spring hunting but a referendum that could eventually lead to the abolition of other minority sectors. This, he warned, could be a dangerous precedent but he had full confidence in the Maltese people that they did not want extremism.

Mr Cacopardo denied that this was a dangerous precedent, saying it was a positive precedent as civil society was sending a message to the country that where the parties in parliament did not decide, the people could decide in a democratic manner through their vote.

Asked about the possibility that the FKNK could order a boycott of the referendum, Mr Farrugia said the options were to vote or not to vote. Directions and directives would be issued in due time.

A turnout of over 50% is needed for the referendum to be valid.

Times of Malta reports today that the tactics employed by the hunting lobby in the referendum will depend heavily on the positions taken by the two main political parties, according to electoral experts.

“It all boils down to what the parties do. They are the main motivators when it comes to getting people to vote. And they have played a major role in previous referenda,” one expert said.

It will not be the first time a party has lobbied for an abstention. Former Labour leader Alfred Sant urged voters to abstain or write “Viva Malta” on the voting document in the EU membership referendum in 2003. Similarly, then Nationalist Party leader George Borg Olivier called on voters to abstain on Dom Mintoff’s integration referendum in 1956.

Expert opinion on the possibility of another call for abstention is varied, with some arguing the hunting lobby will be “committing electoral suicide” if they lobby for this.

“Voter turnout is so high on the island that it would be illogical to gear up for an abstention.Keep in mind that both parties will already be urging half the population to vote for the local council elections [on the same day of the referendum]. The tactic didn’t work for Sant and I don’t think it will work here,” one expert said.

Another electoral expert who has advised on previous referendum campaigns believes that half the population will probably not turn up because it will not be their turn to vote in local councils.

“You’ve got half the population who is not being summoned to vote. If the parties stay out of the referendum issue, I can’t see [the coalition] mobilising voters to head to the polls. I don’t know what their resources are but it takes a huge team making phone calls and chasing people,” the expert said, adding that the hunting referendum was not a “bread and butter issue” like joining the EU. Other experts believe that if the Labour Party takes a stand in favour of hunting, then hunters would be best off going for the win.