Nationalist MEP Simon Busuttil described Acta this afternoon as an agreement to further strengthen enforcement in the fight against counterfeit and piracy. But Labour MEP Edward Scicluna said he was against it, because he did not want people to rummage through his luggage to see if he had any counterfeit products. This, he said, was one of the provisions of the agreement.
Acta, the anti-counterfeiting trade agreement was the subject of a well-attended KSU debate at the University.
Dr Busuttil said he was positively inclined to Acta because it aimed to strengthen enforcement in the fight against counterfeit and piracy. EU countries including Malta already have strong legislation on these two issues but this agreement sought to focus on the enforcement aspect.
"In principle I cannot object to it because I am in favour of the fight against counterfeit and piracy because itius illegal and because there are thousands of people in Malta who are working for Maltese companies producing goods or software who could be victims of false products. Their job is at risk everyday because of counterfeit and pirate products.
People were looking at Acta in a negative way because of the impression they got that it will restrict internet use and freedoms. But the downloading of films or music is already illegal. He noted that the EP has not yet voted on the matter but will vote on it probably in June.
In the meantime there was space for debate.
"Although in principle I am not against it I am open to what people have to say about it. If the negatives outweigh the positives I am willing to vote against," Dr Busuttil said.
Edward Scicluna appealed to students not to try and understand the details of Acta but rather to see who the players behind it are.
"Crime prevention and policing comes at a cost because it interferes with our freedoms. I am not in favour of economic crime but one has to balance the cost of interference with civil liberties.
The European Socialist Party was suspicious of this agreement from the outset and there was a healthy dose of scepticism.
Prof. Scicluna said he was against Acta because he did not want people to rummage through his luggage to see if he had any counterfeit products. This was one of the provisions of Acta.
But lawyer Antonio Ghio, who specialises in intellectual property rights, said the clause regarding travellers personal luggage was preceded by the word may not should because crossing a border with a counterfeit bag was different to crossing a border with a container of counterfeit bags. This strengthened the fact that personal privacy would not be violated
He said Acta was trying to achieve a level of harmonisation with respect to enforcement of intellectual property rights and tried to reach a consensus of how these rights could be protected.
"The myth that it will restrict freedom of expression or that Acta will turn internet users into criminals and ISPs into policemen is all rubbish," he said adding that most of the provisions of Acta were already part of Maltese laws.
The big question that should be answered, he said, was why Malta and other countries were signing the agreement if it was already covered in their laws.
He drew a parallel to the Convention of Human Rights and said that similarly Malta had subscribed to convention even though its contents were already enshrined in its laws.
Asked about the lack of transparency behind the agreement, Dr Busuttil admitted that it was not completely transparent because negotiations had been underway since 2008 or earlier.
These were always held behind closed doors but this does not mean that the whole process was not transparent. There was a draft agreement in 2008 and another draft agreement in 2010. This has been in the public domain since 2010 but it did not hit the media so people did not know about it. He said there was an element of secrecy about Acta but it was now before MPs who had the final say. If they said no, Acta would be dead. He also said that it was not clear yet whether this had to be approved by all EU countries for it to come into effect.
Prof. Scicluna said people had to beware of big industries who were pushing for this agreement. He mentioned as an example the tobacco industry and the impact this had on civil society and the pharmaceutical industry.
Big industries were going to protect their properties but this should not be done at the cost of interfering with civil liberties. He also said that downloading a film illegally did not mean that the police would come knocking at one's door to arrest him but the agreement would target people providing this service for economic gain.
Prof. Scicluna will be attending the protest against Acta on Saturday.