Reconstitution of the Committee
Regarding the ruling that referred the legitimacy of the new constitution of the Constitutional Court to the National Wildlife Technical CommitteeWe must highlight some public reactions; all of them disorganized and ridiculous in their method and substance. We must begin by saying that ARCICACCIA was the first to fight for the Committee's reconstitution and, therefore, was and remains convinced of its usefulness. We also believed that this could be the starting point for a strong and shared proposal to reform Law 157, not the trivial matter being discussed today. First, we urge animal rights and environmental organizations not to take on, as they did in the article in Il Fatto Quotidiano, a battle of principle that they cowardly chose not to wage. The sea of lies we heard at the press conference for the submission of 400.000 signatures against the reform of Law 157 clearly demonstrated that their goal is not to defend the law, but to permanently ban hunting.
You May Also Like ..
Dangerous action
We will ask the political representatives present if they share this plan. Subsequently, we witnessed Agribio's concerned reaction (see Coldiretti and others). We respond to the organization of private reserves: calling the actions of a recognized association, excluded for purely political reasons from an important institutional body, dangerous means deeming democratic representation in the country's public life a threat. Because that's what we're talking about, in case it wasn't clear. Since, however, it's crystal clear to us, let's discuss the merits of the proposals for managing hunting in Italy and its future, a more serious and beneficial issue for everyone. Today, Sparvoli of Libera Caccia joined the chorus, even invoking Pyrrhus, King of Epirus; this isn't the first direct attack he's leveled against us, and we won't lose sleep over it.
Better Pyrrhus than…
We understand that much work is needed to keep pace in the race to cajole the Minister and the Government, but now we feel we've sunk too low. Suffice it to say that we believe so strongly in the Committee's usefulness that we would like to join it, as required by law. It's about respecting the rule of law and the principle of participation. In many areas, we fight, even alongside ANLC, to obtain proper recognition where we're excluded from the ATC committees. So, is being included among those admitted enough to change our minds? Do principles cost so little? Let's ask President Sparvoli the same question we asked some time ago: why did the Minister endorse the amendment on private reserves that you disagree with? And why, despite this, are you still there applauding? Because, clearly, Pyrrhus is better than... In any case, we calmly await the Court's decision, and whatever happens, we will not stop advancing our ideas on social hunting, which everyone publicly shares, but privately everyone works to destroy (source: Arci Caccia).
