Hunting in Friuli: the Government has challenged the Friuli Venezia Giulia Regional Law on hunting wildlife management, submitting it to the scrutiny of the Constitutional Court.
During the session yesterday, 4 October 2012, the Council of Ministers challenged the Regional Law of Friuli Venezia Giulia no. 15 of 9 August 2012 containing “Provisions for the fulfillment of the obligations of the Friuli Venezia Giulia Region deriving from Italy's membership of the European Communities. Implementation of Directive 2006/123 / EC relating to services in the internal market and adaptation to Directive 2009/147 / EC concerning the conservation of wild birds and Directive 92/43 / EEC relating to the conservation of natural and semi-natural habitats and flora and wild fauna. Amendments to regional laws on commercial activities, the administration of food and beverages and wildlife management - hunting (Community law 2010) "as it would present various profiles of constitutional illegitimacy.
While recognizing the primary legislative power to the Region in matters of hunting and fishing, according to a consolidated constitutional jurisprudence, the power to regulate the environment in its entirety has been entrusted exclusively to the State, by art. 117 of the Constitution which speaks of "environment" and "ecosystem" in general and comprehensive terms; Having said this, it follows that it is up to the State to regulate the environment as an organic entity, that is, to dictate protection rules that have as their object the whole and the individual components considered as parts of the whole. It should also be considered that the exercise of hunting is to be included in the notion of environment and ecosystem since this activity affects the protection of the fauna and consequently the balance of the ecosystem.
On the basis of these premises, the following provisions of the law in question are reprehensible for the Government, because in violation of Community obligations, of the constitution, as well as invasive of the exclusive state competence in violation of the constraints placed on the provincial legislator, the following provisions of the law in question: first of all article 15 with which on the one hand provides for the possibility of withdrawal "for the purposes referred to in Article 5, paragraph 1, letter g)", or for the capture of small quantities, on the other specifies that "the derogation measures are issued for the purposes referred to in article 5, paragraph 1 "that is, for all provisions of derogation.
The dubious formulation of the rule, therefore, is likely to allow that derogation measures can be adopted by the Regional Council with a procedure that is independent of the ISPRA opinion and for any purpose, in clear violation of the National Law 157/1992 which requires, instead of, for the derogation measures must be consulted with the National Institute for Wildlife (today ISPRA) or with the institutes recognized at the regional level.
Still with regard to the exceptions, the Government highlights how the regional law provides for the possibility for the Regional Council to adopt the derogation provision upon expiry of a short term (thirty days) given to the Regional Wildlife Committee for the examination of the proposal, after which regardless of opinion. This provision, introducing a mechanism of silent consent, allows for the adoption of derogation measures in the absence of the opinion of ISPRA or of the regional institutes required by Law 157/92.
Furthermore, the same regional law in question provides that the derogations cannot be activated for the species for which a serious decrease in the number has been ascertained, during the nesting period of the birds or during the migration phase for their return to the place. of nesting, without prejudice to the control activity of alien species, thus placing itself in sharp contrast with the Law 157/92 according to which the derogations cannot concern species whose numerical consistency is in serious decrease whatever the purpose of the derogation .
The Government then underlines that the withdrawal in derogation does not constitute an activity of control of the allochthonous species which must instead be carried out with selective withdrawals through the use of ecological methods on the opinion of ISPRA.
Article 18 of the Friulian Regional Law is also contested, which generically provides for the release of "ready-to-hunt" game, entrusting the hunting reserves with the task of establishing the times and methods for the introduction of said game "notwithstanding the current legal provisions ". Leaving aside any assessment on the provision regarding the possibility of derogating from the provisions of the law, the Government highlights how the law n.157 / 92, in art. 16 recognizes as private hunting facilities only the hunting farms in which restocking can be carried out no later than 31 August and the agri-tourism hunting farms, where the releases with farmed game can only be carried out during the hunting season.
Added to this is that the regional law is in contrast with the state legislation by providing for the possibility of authorizing the retrievers of killed wild fauna equipped with weapons to operate in hours and days of hunting silence. For these reasons, the Government has decided to challenge the Friuli Venezia Giulia Regional Law pursuant to Article 127 of the Constitution.
(October 5, 2012)