From the Umbria "No" to the dl to prohibit the access of hunters to closed-end funds. Approved by a majority (11 votes in favor of the 12 councilors present) the motion of the League asking the Giunta of Palazzo Donini a "commitment to demonstrate the most firm opposition to the initiative bill of Senators Perilli and Maiorino, containing: amendments to the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code and the Civil Code, as well as other provisions on animal protection, regarding the repeal of article 842 of the civil code ". A law that for hunting associations, if approved, risks giving a severe blow to hunting in Italy.
Illustrating the address in the Chamber, Councilor Mancini explained that "the initiative of the senators aims to cancel the article of the civil code in which it is foreseen that 'the owner of a property cannot prevent entry for the exercise of the hunt, unless the fund is closed in the manner established by the hunting law or there are existing crops susceptible to damage. He can always oppose those who do not have a license issued by the authority. For the exercise of fishing, the consent of the owner of the land is required. In this way - the speaker pointed out - the owner of the land will always be able to prevent hunters from accessing his property. Legal doctrine agrees that the right to hunt is considered a personal right of a public nature, completely independent from the ownership of the fund on which it is exercised.
Finally, it should be remembered the social utility and the importance of the functions of safeguarding the territory and the landscape that are carried out by hunters during the hunting activity, including the control of forest fires and the protection of crops from wildlife ”. Michael Bettarelli (Pd), notoriously sensitive to the requests of hunters, asked that the topic be deepened: “I agree with a large part of the motion which, however, deals with a very complex topic. I am in favor of hunters' access to all properties, without closed funds. However, this is a complex aspect of the proposal by two parliamentarians. I therefore ask that the motion in the Commission be further investigated. Moreover, at the moment not even the commissioner with responsibility for hunting is present ". The same request came from other members of the Democratic Party, Bori and Paparelli. Who criticized not so much the merit of the act (saying they were opposed to interventions that limit the freedom of movement of hunters) as the chosen form. However, the League has decided to vote on the motion, which was approved with 11 votes (Still today).