The unspeakable cheats. It’s not a petition for spring-hunting or a petition to block the referendum. It’s a petition for safeguarding the rights of minority groups.
Published:
June 3, 2014 at 1:52am
Look at the wording of the title of the hunters’ petition. Look at the main text, or what you can see of it in this photograph.
It’s not a petition for spring-hunting. It’s not a petition to block the referendum on spring-hunting. It’s not even a hunters’ petition.
It’s a petition for safeguarding the rights of minority groups. So of course 100,000+ people were diddled into signing it. I probably would have signed it to, had somebody come up to me in a coffee-shop or queue.
What cheats. Unbelievable. But then what do you expect.
84 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140602/local/update-3-hunters-petition-carries-104293-signatures-more-than-pn-vote-at-ep-elections.521659
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-06-02/news/wrongly-jailed-mans-daughter-arrested-and-made-to-testify-in-court-5296226304/
This is a moment of truth for the PN. It should not only disassociate itself from this petition but it should positively (negatively?) oppose it.
This is now not only about animal rights or hunting but about using in a deceitful way the democratic machinery in order to deprive us of a democratic right, that of asking for an abrogative referendum.
The PN should make it clear that it is acting on principle, even at the cost of losing votes in the short term.
Done. The PN did not endorse the petition. Labour did.
Now that the FKNK has those signatures there’s absolutely no reason why the referendum shouldn’t be held.
It is about time for the PN to take a stand, even if not a populist one.
The PN will not gain the hunters’ vote by sitting on a fence. It lost that vote long time ago.
The Nationalist Party has already said what it wanted to say about this. So please inform yourself.
Totally agree. The PN should take a clear stand. They do not have anything to lose as the hunters will always vote PL anyway.
It’s interesting that hunters will always vote PL anyway ; it just proves the truly ‘ negative’ psychological mindset they share – bloodthirsty , macho , conniving bullies .
Spock, which is why they camouflaged their petition as something else in the first place.
In reality, they’re not going to lose many votes because they lost the hunters’ votes a long time ago. Many hunters and trappers either voted Labour or did not vote at all in the last election.
Definitely not. The PN should not disassociate itself or oppose the petition at all. Can’t you just see how this (at least what we see of it) has been worded and marketed so slyly?
The PN should see the petition as it stands and contest its interpretation. How many times must there be an ambush for one to realize what the game has become?
Doing what the manipulative expects one to do is suicide. One of Sun Tzu’s rules is ‘know your enemy’. What you suggest is the opposite, a lamb blindly going to slaughter. Where is Franco Debono now?
The hard part is for the PN to explain and inform the underhand rules to many who would find it difficult to understand such ploys. We have been dragged into a new dirty state of play; let’s not be naive any longer.
In that case, it’s up to Muscat’s lot to prove hunting is a fundamental human right.
Surely the MGRM will have something to say.
Where’s Kenneth Zammit Tabona?
That is exactly what the PN is doing.
It may cause it harsh and cruel (but certainly unjustified) criticism from the ‘hunters’ and their backers – but certainly not from those somehow duped into signing the deceitful ‘petition’ and from those who, like me, rejected quite fearlessly from so doing.
Agreed – PN have lost the hunter vote anyway (not sure they ever had it but that’s another story).
They have nothing to lose and all to gain if they take a position on this (win favour with the environmentalists and any other person who has ever attempted to go camping, picnicking, rambling or generally tried to enjoy the the outdoors and had that spoiled).
Agreed, totally.
Labour government has associated itself completely with this petition. The implications, as you say, are ominous.
Labour cannot backtrack on its deal with the hunters’ lobby, not now, but it will not move alone to have the referendum act amended or repealed in parliament. That would be too risky. So it is attempting to pressure the opposition into acquiescence.
It is not a coincidence that the petition has been presented right after the EP election, with the PN at practically its lowest ebb ever. Neither is it pure chance that the signatures have been made to number a few tantalising thousands more than the PN vote.
It has been said that the PN lacks an issue for which to campaign. Well, now it has, and one that will strike a note with their voter base as a throwback to the 70s and 80s. By championing the referendum as a democratic right, the PN will lose the hunters’ vote forever (it already has anyway), but by so doing it will heap pressure back on government to deliver on its deal with the hunters’ lobby.
This is indeed a moment of truth for the PN. Does its leadership have what it takes?
This morning on 101 news, Beppe Fenech Adami said that the right to hold a referendum is an intrinsic part of democracy.
Bla bla bla rights bla bla democracy bla bla. What does he THINK? What does he WANT? Spring hunting or no spring hunting?
Lawyers, the whole bloody lot.
Baxxter, I think that’s an unfair comment. The hunters’ petition goes beyond hunting. It is an attack on participatory democracy. If their proposed amendment goes through it would block most requests for abrogative referenda. Most laws or policies affect the ‘interests, rights or privileges’ of some sector or other of the population.
Minorities are adequately protected against discrimination by the Maltese constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights. The Referenda Act contains provisions to safeguard these rights.
It’s a very fair comment. I want clear statements from my politicians, not legalistic pussyfooting to avoid offending any electoral segment.
You cannot dissociate the aim of this petition from its organisers. The organisers are the hunting lobby. So we know what the real aim is.
I’m not a lawyer, so don’t expect me to think like one.
How will this work, exactly?
If all rights and privileges of all groups and movements of any size are to be protected at law, no one can ever change anything at any time for any reason to any extent.
It also means that the Opposition should always and forever get its own way however government MPs vote.
‘..The banner also carried pictures of various groups, saying that after the hunters, these minorities may also be targeted. Among them are offroad enthusiasts, horse racing enthusiasts, feast enthusiasts, karozzini owners, fishermen and gay people…’
Hilarious, now we know who voted Joseph.
I take it off roaders expect garigue to be theirs, horse racing enthusiasts shall cause mayhem to private vehicles and feast enthusiasts must blow themselves up taking extensive picturesque real estate, to live.
This is so progressive, turning a ‘lifestyle’ into a right. How Gabi Calleja can remain silent is what’s grotesque in this fair land. Has she no dignity?
All they want is to block the referendum, scuttling the required process if their ‘signatures’ are to be checked.
If Muscat thinks he can avoid the issue, he got them first.
Or better, does she even realise that what’s implied here is that being gay is a choice?
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-06-02/news/hunters-march-on-valletta-to-present-petition-5297111040/
‘…PL MEP candidates Cyrus Engerer and Clint Camilleri, who both supported spring hunting, are also in attendance, as is Zaren Bonnici tal-Ajkla….’
‘… “The PN does not believe that we should stop the people from their right to hold a referendum. People will then have the chance to vote in favour or against”. A PN statement read that the PN will not move the FKNK motion forward with Parliamentary Secretary Michael Falzon…’
Perfect.
All the 40,000+ who signed the petition to have a referendum on hunting would have no problem in signing that petition as well.
No. I signed the petition for the spring hunting referendum but not the second petition. The second petition raises the question: “what about the interests, rights and privileges of the majority”.
If the proposal in the second petition had to be adopted as a rule by Parliament (if it applies to legislation by referenda, why not to legislation by Parliament?), its effect would be that of blocking most legislation. Democracy would be transformed into a ‘Tyranny of the Minorities’.
The way to address basic individual and minority rights is by entrenching them in the constitution thus making them off limits for any legislative or political authority.
Well if they are so sure that they have so many signatures, we go for a referendum, but the FKNK are afraid so they are trying to stop the referendum. Cowards.
With over 100,000 behind them they are no longer a minority group, so the petition doesn’t apply to them any more!
How many of those who signed the petition are under age?
Quite… so will/can these signatures be verified?
Probably Michael Falzon drafted this and it may include Labour’s wording of a likely future referendum.
You really have to read the fine print with this government. Doublespeak is the order of the day. Cheaters.
No matter what, they cannot stop the anti-spring hunting referendum. Their (hunters) appeal to the public was not a direct question about being in favor of spring hunting but on rights of minorities.
That could be anyone and any sector of the Maltese population. I think this is a legal issue in itself as to what is going to happen now, will we have the referendum? on the other hand they (hunters) should support the anti-hunting group as THEY are in the minority 100,000 and not the hunters’ 104,000.
Hunters may be a minority but then again so are pedophiles, rapists, murderers and cannibals.
The people who stole public land to build shanty towns right on some of our beautiful beaches are also a minority.
This petition means absolutely nothing because with or without it the reasonable and valid minorities like gay people will always have their rights safeguarded.
Bring on the referendum, let us ban spring hunting once & for all.
Going by the hunters petition, the people who signed a petition for a referendum on spring hunting (30,000 people ?) are also a minority. You can hardly call 30,000 people a majority.
Are the rights of the minority who signed the petition also catered for in the hunters petition ?
What lying scum.
Minority rights are only minority rights when the rights claimed by the minority are not in conflict with rights claimed by a majority.
If a minority of people state that they have the right to breathe in clean air and that therefore they want all cars to be taken off the road, this would clash with the majority of people who want to drive.
Hence that is not a minority right since it cannot co-exist with the right of the majority.
I am also sure that the general population would not be concerned with dragster racing, and if a referendum were to be held to abolish same, most people would not turn up to vote, because what a couple of enthusiasts do in Hal Far does not concern the general population, and hence dragster racing would in fact constitute a minority right because it cannot affect anyone.
However, bird-shooting and trapping do concern a large part of the population who might hate the senseless killing of birds and who cannot during the hunting season enjoy the countryside without being told to “move away” by a man with a gun. There are also environmental and conservationist concerns which must be taken into account.
If a substantial number of people turn out to vote in a referendum, that would not make hunting a minority right, but it would be a clash of two conflicting rights.
Driving is not a right. Parking your car in reserved spaces on public streets is not a right.
Minorities? No wonder Cyrus Engerer was present. Nowadays it’s all about minorities and this concept obfuscates the bigger and most important picture.
Muscat and Labour are after votes. They went to bed with the devil and now they have to serve him. Imagine, even Eddy Privitera became a staunch supporter of both the gay and shooting-everything-that-flies lobbies. Privitera reflects the myopic mentality of those who voted Labour.
There is a case to make using the laws against animal cruelty and the principles of biodiversity and conservation, which surely are over and above the right of any minority group.
This petition is not worth the paper it is written on. The law as it is today is that if 10% (not sure) of the electorate signs a petition, then government is obliged to carry out a referendum on the subject; but this can only be used to abrogate an existing law, not to modify or make new ones.
Presenting this ‘petition’ as a show of force (even denigrating the PN in the process) to an avid killer of birds, in the vest of a Parliamentary Secretary, backed by a Minister who spends endless times looking for ‘cracks’ (his words not mine) in the EU regulations to appease hunters, is a sign of the times that we are living under the Labour ‘marmalja’.
The anti-hunting lobby would do well to man the trenches and prepare itself well, since Joseph Muscat will surely find a way not to hold the referendum, which is a citizens’ right in a democratic country.
If the hunters’ lobby feels so strong, then they should be calling for the referendum as soon as possible to outvote the anti-hunting lobby.
This is going to be used by Muscat in identical fashion to manipulate the PN into yet another tight corner.
All the PN has to do is maintain the position taken by Busuttil.
If I were him, wouldn’t mind mentioning the derogation as the price we had to pay to become members of the EU. That Busuttil himself prefers to jog.
That when hunting is taken as a fundamental human right, therapy may be required.
Although with Muscat, we’ll have his elves saying Busuttil suggested gays be sent to therapy.
There’s a mad hatter’s tea party somewhere.
Stamp collecting is a fundamental human right. I oppose any attempt at replacing the post by email.
I take it you expect stamp albums be subsidised.
If I were the PN, I would communicate the message differently: (a) the PN is in agreement with minority rights and these are enshrined in the Constitution and in the Declaration of Human rights;
(b) the PN agrees with spring hunting as long as it is sustainable and that protected species are not killed;
(c) it is the burden on those hunters to prove that they are a minority at law AND that hunting plus killing protected species is a fundamental human right.
“Perception is not reality.” “Perception is what exists in the mind.”
Now that the PL has endorsed it the voters will block the referendum (by not voting or staying at home). It will be very difficult to bring out the PL voters which are a big majority. It is as good as lost. Spring hunting is here to stay.
Yes, that is probably true. But it might be the unfortunate price we have to pay in this dire moment. If the hunters win the referendum with Joseph Muscat’s help it will be more difficult for him to pose as liberal and progressive, the most European of them all. And he could not realistically pose as a defender of minorities. The majority would have won against the wishes of the minority who, along with the rest of Europe, want to abolish spring hunting.
Il-PN irrid jiehu hsieb il-bullying li jaghmlu kontinwament, specjalment mal-familjari taghhom.
Ghax dak li kellu jitlef diga tilfu.
Aren’t hunters a minority group?
So what is all this hype?
Since when are those who fight for the rights of the minorities CHEATS?
Another test for the P.N.
[Daphne – The point is, Mr Loporto, that many of the people who signed that petition were after the protection of minority groups, not after the protection of hunting in spring. And I think you will find that people who are interested in protecting the rights of minority groups (asylum seekers, refugees, religious minorities..) are generally not so fascinated by bird-shooting. Hunters are not a minority group with rights. They are people with a hobby, which is different. Rights have nothing to do with hobbies.]
Daphne, you’re right.
It’s a game of words. They purposely use the word “rights” when referring to hunting to confuse issues and make the sheeple parrot it.
The right to hunt is brought about simply by an archaic law that enables the practice.
Minority rights are the “recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family”.
The two are worlds apart.
Case in point, myself. I am against all forms of hunting, and will vote against spring hunting (or any other form of hunting in a referendum). I was approached in a cafe’ and I signed the petition because there was no mention of hunting, but just protection of minority groups. In my case I was thinking of Humanists/Agnostics/Atheists.
The form that I willingly signed, had written at the bottom that it was being issued by the federation of hunters.
So I for one, was not cheated, and surely did not think that it was something that had to do by some other minority group.
Hey, paedophiles and murderers are a minority group too, no?
Of course they are, but they are also criminals.
I hope you are not suggesting that all hunters are criminals?
No Silvio. What I ask you is the following: since paedophiles and murderers are a minority group, should be fight for their rights just because they are a minority group?
Loporto,
if one had to take the fundamentals of this petition, Muslim women could find themselves subjected to informal shar’ia law courts.
Paedophiles could lobby for the decriminalisation of their sick perversion.
Extremes make the perfect test case here.
Well it shows how malicious they are . They have no respect for majorities either.
This has nothing to do with respect, but rights.
Majority rights are automatic. It’s the minority rights that need to be protected. In a general sense, there is nothing wrong (on the contrary, there is everything right) about this petition.
Of course this would make it impossible to remove through referenda laws that enable archaic practices. This does not mean that these same laws cannot be removed by the government of the day. The catch here is that no party would be able to use the excuse of the opinion of the majority through a referendum for removing laws such as the hunting laws.
There’s no denying it was well played.
I doubt it how hunting can ever be considered an inalienable right.
What are offroaders’ rights?
What utter nonsense.
Firstly, majority rights are not automatic. Where did you get that idea from? Rights are fundamental and have evolved over centuries of human society and do not become just because of a majority at the ballot box.
If this were the case, then any point that was a majority view would become an automatic right. For example, the majority may take offence at the things you say and assert that you should be banned from posting on the Internet. Should that become a right because the majority say so?
Secondly, a referendum is a hallmark of a democratic society where the electorate can vote on an issue that has been put to them. That is where the majority can express it’s opinion either way.
Thirdly, consider this —
The anti spring hunting lobby collected 40,000 signatures on a specific point to outlaw spring hunting. These are in the process of being verified.
The pro spring hunting lobby collected 100,000 signatures on a general point to protect minority rights. Who has verified these?
They have not countered the original point with a specific counter-argument which is obfuscation to the point of deceit.
Personally, I have always had a problem with mass petitions for the reasons above and have the opinion that they should not be allowed to influence government policy unless they have the backing of a democratic vote.
If you think this situation was well played, then I doubt your sense of justice.
It’s deception all the way. We have all been deceived. From the Malta Taghna Lkoll charade, through the IIP scheme which was kept hidden from us at election campaign time, to this charade of a supposedly anti anti-hunting referendum campaign.
If the Maltese voters cannot understand this then we are in for a slide into the gutter.
Spot on, Muscat still hasn’t legitimised his double majority.
It follows from his ‘road map’, which it isn’t.
Per la serie il-voti li xtara, milli ghandhom se jtuh.
If it’s true they have all that support, I ask myself why are they ‘afraid’ of the abrogative referendum by wanting to block it?
They know they would probably lose so they’re trying to blackmail government into blocking it by obfuscation.
If we, who want the countryside safe from hunters, are in a minority, are those people petitioning in our favour ?
Cunning.
Hunting was definitely on its way out. Now they found a way to keep it there by means of good legal advice. Such an amendment would not only benefit them, but society in general, and this is what makes it hard to deflect this petition.
What could perhaps be done is to organise a counter petition, approaching the same 104293 asking them whether they felt deceived by the hunting lobby and whether they wish to retract their signatures on the original petition.
The usual game. Trying to play the underdog card.
When hunters say they are a minority group because of their ‘hobby’, are they assuming this in relation to the population in general or to other ‘groups’ of hobbyists, groups of nies b’delizzju Malti, or indeed, sportsmen?
For instance, how small is their group when compared to say, pigeon breeders (another group of hobbyists) or football fans (another group of sportsmen), or regatta afficionadoes (sport Malti)?
The comparisons are endless but surely comparing them to the entire population is beside the point. Ovvja li dejjem ser ikunu f’ minoranza.
Minority rights refers to the normal individual rights as applied to members of racial, ethnic, class, religious, linguistic or sexual minorities, and also, to the collective rights accorded to minority groups.
I cannot understand by what stretch of the imagination hunters and trappers can be said to fall within this definition. Defining them as a minority entitled to be legally treated as such robs the concept of all meaning. Real minorities, beware.
One hasn’t a God-given right to shoot birds. I signed the petition specifically on the principle that what was agreed with the EU must stay. If we want to remove the much-dreaded spring hunting, it is up to us as a nation and not because the EU says so.
Malta Today quoted someone from Bird Life (?) going with the name of Cash – he or she should get out of the way and leave it to Rudolph Ragonesi or some other Maltese counterpart.
If people start feeling that foreigners are dictating to us what to do they will vote en masse in favour of spring hunting to make a point that it is us who decide what goes on in our country.
I hope the referendum takes place together with the local council elections next year. People are tired of voting.
Unfortunately I am one of those who signed it. There wasn’t anything in it to suggest that it was about spring hunting, nor did they tell me what it was for. Otherwise I would have never signed it.
Don’t play the fool, please.
It’s just a petition .
Michael Falzon is a cabinet member and he should not have handled the petition, an MP should have received the petition.
I saw MEP Labour candidate Clint Camilleri being applauded after joining the march.
Anton Refalo , the ophtalmologist and Justyn Caruana would betterwatch their backs!
It is the NGOs concerned that have to make the battle cry. It is no use for the PN to make a crusade and when they look behind their shoulders they find no one.
The PN will simply back the coalition’s right to hold a referendum.
If the FKNK gathered a hundred thousand signatures, no reason why they should block it.
Democracy can take two forms: (i) direct, where the electorate votes on laws and policies or (ii) representative, where the electorate elects representatives to decide on laws and policies.
Although the direct model is a purer model of democracy, it is unworkable in large communities, and our constitution, like many others, adopts the representative model. The Referenda Act, however, creates a space for a limited form of direct democracy.
From a democratic standpoint, a decision to abrogate a law by a referundum is, therefore, no different than a similar decision taken by Parliament – indeed, it is a purer expression of the people’s will.
The purpose of the hunters’ petition is to amend the Referenda Act to block any abrogative referendum that can affect the interests, rights or privileges of a minority. Since there is no legitimate justification to distinguish between an abrogation of a law by Parliament and an abrogation made directly by the people, if you take the reasoning behind the petition to its logical conclusion, Parliament should also be prevented from abrogating any legislation that can affect minority interests, rights or privileges.
In essence, the hunters’ petition is a denial of majority rule which would make all forms of democracy unworkable. Most deliberations and decisions on policy and legislation have an impact on minority interests or rights, let alone privileges.
For instance, employment legislation affects the interests of employers and consumer legislation affects the interest of producers and retailers. On the reasoning contained in the hunters’ petition, employment and consumer legislation should be blocked unless approved by employers, producers and retailers.
The rights of individuals and, as a result, minorities are protected by the basic human rights provisions in the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 16 of the Referenda Act lists the circumstances in which a request for a referendum can be opposed.
One of the grounds refers to the Constitution and the European Convention Act and is aimed at ensuring that the abrogation of a law will not affect any basic human rights. At least, whoever drafted the hunters’ petition had the decency not to suggest that hunting is a basic human right.
Cheats. the lot of them.
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/lifestyle/environment/39585/hunters_gather_in_valletta_to_present_petition_to_mps#.U424T3KSyig
One of the comments;
‘…Kaċċaturi huma minoranza, il-LGBTI huma f’minoranza, il-handicapped huma minoranza – imma kollha flimkien iproduċew 104,000 firma ta’ appoġġ għall-petizjoni tal-kaċċaturi – u l-gvern laburista ma jistax jinjora l-akbar lobby ta’ Malta wara dak tal-MUVIMENT LABURISTA!!!…’
Muscat’s ‘Muviment’ hatches one of its own. The natural progression.
Others’ comments display major disdain for all reactionary NGO’s except this one; patron of Muscat’s middle class.
The cultural revolution beckons.
What are “privileggi”?
Why equate “drittijiet”, “interessi” and “privileggi”?
Because Xarabank.
According to Carmen Sammut on Balzan’s Reporter yesterday, the environment is just a lobby group.
So the doublespeak thrives. It does seem Muscat has to keep the PN as close as possible, lest it distinguish itself clearly.
The trick is Muscat’s double portrayal of Busuttil as the loser and by syllogical default Labour as the better PN.
Thus his power closes on those who denigrate the PN, perhaps to please.
When Muscat cannot afford anything other than the tones of an electoral campaign, this will be the perpetual state of affairs.
And Balzan will keep asking for signs of life and vitality from the PN, as if that’s what has to keep Labour in check.
What a place.
The most annoying thing about this petition is that, when they were collecting signatures, it wasn’t mentioned that it was for hunting.
Yes, granted, I shouldn’t have been gullible but I wonder how many others were tricked into signing the petition like I was.
I have no doubt that this shamefull petition was written by Labour’s Michael Falzon himself and that the majority who signed it did not know what it was all about.
I suspect that the 25,000 illiterate are amongst those who signed petition.
Nixtieq jasal mzmien fejn il-kelma kacca ma tibqax fid-dizzjunarju Malti. Ban the shooting and trapping of birds in Malta! Hafna drabi jinqatlu ghalxejn l-ghasafar ghax lanqas biss jiekluhom.
The petition is utter bollocks. So what happens when two minorities have conflicting ‘rights’ (meaning interests), like the Ramblers Association and FKNK. They clearly conflict.