Henry Fenech Azzopardi (The Sunday Times of Malta, September 8), claimed that “the EU lost its claim against spring hunting at the European Court of Justice”.

I do not think your correspondent read the court’s ruling. The court (September 10, 2009) gave a ruling in 69 numbered paragraphs. The last paragraph under ‘Costs’ reads as follows:

“Under Article 69 (2) of the rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party’s pleadings. Since the Commission has applied for costs against the Republic of Malta and since the Republic of Malta has been unsuccessful, it must be ordered to pay the costs.

“On those grounds, the court (Second Chamber) hereby:

1. Declares that, by authorising the opening of a hunting season for quails (Coturnix coturnix) and turtle doves (Streptopelia turtur) during the spring migration period in the years 2004 to 2007, without complying with the conditions laid down in Article 9 (1) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, as amended, in respect of 2004 to 2006, by Council Regulation (EC) No 807/2003 of 14 April 2003, and, in respect of 2007, by Council Directive 2006/105/EC of 20 November 2006, the Republic of Malta has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2.    Orders the Republic of Malta to pay the costs.”

The European Commission never lost the case against Malta, and we have heard ad nauseam from various quarters, political and otherwise, the wrong assertion that Malta won the case against the Commission.

The fact is that Article 9 of the Birds Directive gives the right to every member state to derogate from the provisions of four of the articles for the following reasons:

In the interests of public health and safety; in the interest of air safety; to prevent serious damage to crops, livestock, forests, fisheries and water; for the protection of flora and flora;

For the purpose of research and teaching, of re-population, of re-introduction and for the breeding necessary for these purposes;

To permit, under strictly supervised conditions and on a selective basis, the capture, keeping or other judicious use of certain birds in small numbers.

In the past few years Malta has used the last ‘reason’ to use the derogation, and opened a limited spring hunting season. I will not deal here with the matter whether or not ‘small numbers’ are taken each time the season has been opened. It would be quite interesting to find out how much it cost Malta when it lost its case.