While reiterating that it has acted in line with the understandings reached during Malta’s accession negotiations to the EU, the government said it regrets that the Commission has decided to act as if the subject was never even discussed during these negotiations.

The Government said that it is aware that the Commission considers itself constrained by the decision of the European Court of Justice to ban spring hunting in Finland after the country was found to have breached the Birds Directive, adding that the facts of the case do not necessarily find a parallel in Malta’s.

The government further said that the decision on which the Court is relying was delivered on the 15th December 2005, while the Commission has initiated proceedings in relation to the derogation utilised by Malta for the period between  the 1st and 22nd May 2004.  

On Wednesday the European Commission gave Malta one month to reply to a supplementary warning letter over the island breaching the European Union (EU) Birds Directive. The letter, following a first one issued last July, calls on authorities to justify why the hunting of turtle dove and quail in spring has been allowed.

Furthermore, the Commission has widened its legal action which will now not only cover the permit granted in 2004 when Malta's acceded to the EU, but also subsequent permits for the following years.

Speaking to The Times of Malta on Wednesday’s, European Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said he hoped the Maltese authorities will comply with EU law on spring hunting without the need to take this matter to court.

While noting that Malta has only been given one month, instead of the customary two to respond to the formal notice, the Commissioner added that should Malta fail to submit a satisfactory reply, the Commission will have no other option but to enter reasoned opinion stage, the second step in the EU's legal proceedings.

The Maltese government applied derogations for hunting of two bird species - turtle dove and quail - on the basis that insufficient hunting opportunities existed at other times of the year. However it was concluded that a satisfactory solution to spring hunting existed during the autumn, a less vulnerable period for birds, and that, therefore, no derogation from the Birds Directive was justifiable.