Birdlife Malta said today that e-mails sent to it by the head of the Wild Birds Regulation Unit amounted to intimidation and "an apparent attempt to silence the organisation from exposing the impact of illegal hunting".
In an e-mail exchange regarding photos of protected birds which were shot last week published by Birdlife Malta, Sergei Golovkin told the NGO: “it does not appear to be the case that Birdlife has any authorisation to possess, control or keep any specimen of any bird, whether alive or dead, nor to kill any live birds by performing euthanasia on veterinary grounds. Kindly be guided by the above legal provisions accordingly.”
This warning had been made, Birdlife said, even though a judge ruled just two months ago that the NGO carried out such work in the best interest of birds. The government recently provided the organisation with a building to use as a rehabilitation centre for shot and injured birds.
Furthermore, the legal provisions quoted by Mr Golovkin included an exemption "where such possession is required for the rehabilitation, veterinary or other treatment or culling of the specimen on veterinary grounds".
BLM conservation manager Nicholas Barbara said this was a clear attempt by Mr Golovkin to intimidate Birdlife and prevent it from rescuing shot birds and raising awareness about the impact of illegal hunting.
"Not only is his claim invalid, but his behaviour is simply an abuse of power, and not what the public expect from the head of a government unit which should be working in favour of exposing the illegal killing of birds.”
“Exposing the illegal hunting of birds, which authorities such as the Wild Birds Regulation Unit should be curtailing rather than concealing, is something we will continue to do regardless,” Mr Barbara insisted.
UNIT DENIES INTIMIDATION
In a reaction, the Wild Birds Regulation Unit said it was denying the claim of intimidation. It said it had acted correctly by requesting compliance with the law on the conservation of wild birds.
"The law prohibits possession or keeping of any birds, or their culling, unless authorised under Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations," it said.
It said its action was an attempt prevent the organisation from rescuing shot birds and raising awareness about the impact of illegal hunting. Birdlife was free to exercise its functions and to raise awareness about illegal hunting as it deemed fit, however its actions must not go beyond the provisions of the law.
"Regulation 4 (1) (e) of the Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations (SL 504.71) prohibits anyone from being 'in possession or in control of or keep any specimen of any bird, whether alive or dead, or any recognisable parts or derivatives of any such bird not listed in Schedule II or Schedule III, unless he proves that such bird: (i) has been declared with the Malta Environment and Planning Authority or its predecessor by the 31st May 2003 and such person is in possession of the permits, or certificates of registration by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority or its predecessor or by the Wild Birds Regulation Unit to keep such bird in accordance with regulation 21; or (ii) is lawfully imported in accordance with regulation 6(1)(a); or (iii) is taken in a Member State where it was lawfully hunted or captured or otherwise lawfully acquired under the terms of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Conservation of Wild Birds and under the legislation of that Member State.”
This implied that the handling of any injured / dead wild birds (for whichever purpose) was illegal, unless the above prohibitions are observed, or unless possession was duly authorized in accordance with the regulations.
"Birdlife (Malta) is not covered by any such authorization to possess, control or keep any specimen of any bird, whether alive or dead, nor to kill any live birds by performing euthanasia on veterinary grounds."