Top comment: “the overarching constitutional argument against scaremongering by bird exterminators”

Giovanni Bonello sent in this comment earlier today, beneath my post about the lawyers’ press conference.

———-

What was yesterday signed by the 12 jurists (including myself) is the irrefutable legal argument, which I fully endorse.

In my view, there is also a more overarching constitutional argument against the scaremongering of the bird exterminators – “all hobbies are now in danger”.

No, they are not.

There are some superior values that are expressly protected by the Constitution or by law. Among these are the landscape, the environment, the guardianship of nature, the survival of biodiversity.

There are ‘hobbies’ or ‘traditions’ which go against these protected values, there are hobbies that are neutral, and there are hobbies that actually promote these values.

It is perfectly permissible to abolish or regulate, by law or by referendum, hobbies or traditions that go against the higher values secured by the Constitution or by law. Spring hunting is about the only popular hobby or tradition that violates these protected higher values.

It is perfectly permissible to hold a referendum that would abolish an activity harmful to values endorsed by the Constitution and by law, such as spring hunting.

But it is wholly unconstitutional and illegal to try to hold a referendum to abolish an activity that does not go against any superior value protected by the Constitution or by law.

I assume full responsibility for this assurance.