FESAC Seminar The EU Arms Directive the Malta Arms

FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” Hotel Le Meridien – Malta 6th June 2008 Speakers (in order of presentation): Stephen A. Petroni Gisela Kallenbach Joseph St. John Peter Paul Zammit Josef Formosa Gauci Clyde Puli Chairman, FESAC MEP & Rapporteur – Keynote Speaker Director Policy, Ministry of Justice & Home Affairs Superintendent (Head of Legal Office), Malta Police CEO, Malta Tourism Authority Parliamentary Secretary, Youth & Sports FESAC CHAIRMAN STEPHEN PETRONI opened the proceedings by thanking Mrs. Kallenbach for accepting his invitation to address the FESAC Seminar. He welcomed the official guests, FESAC country delegates and observers, stating that although yearly conferences had been held since FESAC was set up fifteen years ago, this was the first FESAC Seminar to open its doors to non-members. During the past months FESAC had risen to the occasion by defending members’ rights at EU level. It was frequently consulted and it kept regular contact with Mrs. Kallenbach throughout the drafting of the Amendments. It built bridges with allied organisations and gained respect and confidence through its serious and honest approach which always reflected FESAC’s belief that rights do not come without responsibilities. In the end it was successful in attaining due recognition of the arms collector’s role in society as a dedicated person who is in effect a curator of our common heritage. Collectors preserve the artefacts which they collect, passing them on to future generations along with the results of years of research. Most museums began as private collections. The possession of arms and their use must obviously be regulated. However the scope should always be to protect the bona fide enthusiast and the general public from those whose aim is to abuse of the law. Moreover, organised crime has its own resources and while no effort should be spared in combating crime this should not be done to the detriment of law-abiding enthusiasts. It is FESAC’s duty to oppose attempts by uninformed legislators to introduce repressive laws. To this end the Foundation works closely with the authorities, especially the Police who play a critical role in fighting criminality. Member national organisations should act as a filter when introducing aspirant collectors into the system. It must be assured that these new members are truly dedicated to pursuing their interests in a responsible manner. A code of ethics is indispensable to convince the authorities that serious enthusiasts share the same objectives. Mr. Petroni believes that FESAC’s role is now to also become a proactive organisation. It should be in a position to propose positive changes at EU and National level which would enhance security yet at the same time allow recognised collectors the freedom to gather artefacts and to enhance their knowledge to impart it to others. This is what had occurred in Malta. The Association of Maltese Arms Collectors & Shooters (AMACS) had gained the authorities’ confidence and this paved the way for the introduction of the Arms Act which fully recognises collectors and shooters against a background of stringent yet reasonable regulation. FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” - Hotel Le Meridien – Malta, 6th June 2008 MRS GISELLA KALLENBACH spoke about the recent Amendments to the EU Arms Directive. She has been an MEP since 2004. This was her first task as a Rapporteur and she immediately became aware that she was handling a sensitive issue. She set out to find a proper balance between the needs of the enthusiasts in Member States and the preservations of security and safety of EU citizens. During the process she had learned several lessons. As there is only one Rapporteur per issue, the appointee has considerable leverage. She soon discovered the influence of the lobbyists but also felt that this had been a good experience for her. The original intention had been to transpose the UN Protocol provisions into the Arms Directive in order to combat the illicit trafficking of arms to third countries. The main scope of the Directive was to facilitate the legal transfer of arms between EU Member States. From the onset she became aware that it was not simply a question of technical adjustment and an in-depth study was necessary. She ruefully admitted that the first draft amendments had been a catastrophe. It was rejected and the lobbyists played a part in this, using various approaches. Some groups were not ready to accept any change. However others were constructive and provided justifications for their arguments. Accordingly, she had looked at these arguments and the reasons behind them. FESAC was one of the serious lobbyists. It had been a long process, but she was pleased with the end result. In their final version the Amendments achieved a record strong support in Parliament. Eighty percent of the proposals were accepted, which was a good result. There is a period of eighteen months from the date of publication (which is imminent) within which Members States must transpose the Amendments into national legislation. Mrs. Kallenbach listed the salient points of the approved Amendments: Collectors: She had changed her attitude. At first she proposed that collectors ought to be included in the Directive, because of the risk of feeding the traffic in weapons. FESAC was successful in pointing out that organised crime has its own resources and it does not rely on museums or collectors. As collectors play an important part in preserving our heritage, she was also aware of the risk of damaging the value of collections. Therefore it was better not to include collectors in the Directive. Marking: This supports the better tracing of a firearm. A numerical marking should always be visible on a fixed major part of a weapon, to trace it in the event of misuse. However Collectors’ firearms are not included. Registration: She had wanted to extend Police retention of records from the current 5 years. The UN Protocol specified 10 Years, but she felt that 20 years should be feasible with the systems available and that a common EU database should be established. Despite the approval of the German and British Police, she had been unable to gain the support of all Member States due to cost and operational factors. She felt it ironic that registration of cars could be computerised across the Member States but not firearms. Transport: She had set out to make travel easier with the EFP being the only document necessary. Deactivation: This was an important aspect for the Police, due to their conviction that some deactivated firearms could be reactivated with minor intervention. There had also been the problem FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” - Hotel Le Meridien – Malta, 6th June 2008 of firearm look-alikes especially in Germany and Great Britain where they were cases of conversions into firearms for use in crime. A new German Law was now in force and such guns were forbidden. Categories: It had been felt desirable to simplify the existing categories A, B, C and D into just two: A= Forbidden and B = Subject to authorisation. However it had not been possible to obtain a majority. A compromise was therefore sought to keep the four categories, but with everyone needing a licence even for categories C and D. The problem was that the four categories cover different types of arms in the separate Member States. For other goods the EU has simplified the procedure but this was not possible with firearms. Distance Selling: Although it was originally proposed to ban this activity in view of some incidents where arms had been illicitly purchased over the Internet, it was decided to leave this option open to enthusiasts provided that effective controls are applied. Antique Weapons: She had first considered the Schengen definition of “pre-1870” but there had been no general agreement, so she had settled upon the definition of “pre-1900” which is recognised in the UN Protocol. This is the date which was also promoted by FESAC. Shooter Age Limits: She pushed for a ban on under-18s from acquiring a firearm licence, with a derogation for hunting and target shooting but no right to purchase, and the need for parental approval and with a trainer. In conclusion Mrs Kallenbach felt this had been a successful exercise which protected the various interested parties. The Amendments were approved by a huge Parliamentary majority with only 14 MEPs voting against with 11 abstentions. Most political groups supported the final draft and she was looking forward to its incorporation in national legislation. Serious lobbying was perfectly legitimate. In her four years in Parliament lobbyists had wanted to meet with her on a very frequent basis. Mrs Kallenbach felt it was good to seek the experts’ views, leaving the Parliamentarians to make their decisions based on that expert advice. Mrs. Kallenbach appreciated the good relationship which we had established. She was looking forward to our support for the transposition of the Amendments into our national legislation. MR. JOSEPH ST. JOHN stated that the new Home Affairs Minister Dr. Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, sent his apologies for being unable to attend since he was on a visit to Luxembourg. Mr. St.John introduced himself as the Ministry official responsible for the Weapons Board which in turn submitted recommendations to the Minister and the Commissioner of Police. The 2005 Arms Act granted licences to individuals for specific activities – collectors, sports shooters, hunters, range operators, shooting clubs, dealers and gunsmiths – through proper vetting of such persons by the Weapons Board. The Board oversaw other matters which included the classification of arms by type and age. It offered its advice to the Commissioner of Police regarding the importation of guns and the issue of licences. The Ministry aimed for a balanced approach. It was keen to set the stage for future development opportunities, such as amendments to allow for shooters to begin at a younger age, in order to make them more competitive at the international level – with suitable safeguards. FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” - Hotel Le Meridien – Malta, 6th June 2008 The Ministry was currently studying recommendations which were submitted by the Weapons Board. In due course it would also bring national legislation in line with the amended Arms Directive. UN Protocol. It was the Ministry’s intention to enhance security without creating additional bureaucracy. In conclusion, Mr. St. John explained that the Arms Act had been the result of regular consultation with all stakeholders which he thanked for their input. SUPERINTENDENT PETER PAUL ZAMMIT delivered a detailed description of the Malta Arms Act 2005, aided by a PowerPoint presentation. He began by mentioning that he once attended a TV show with Mr. Petroni and it was clear even then that there exists a lot of common ground between the Police and enthusiasts. The Arms Act arose from various concerns, including the UN Protocol as well as the EU Arms Directive. It would have been easy to keep the older Maltese legislation, but the social issues were more complex. Under Maltese law there was no definition of a “collector”. Also hunting was in decline and sports shooting on the increase, directing people into a more “socially acceptable” concept of firearm use. There was a change from holding a licence to have a weapon, to a situation where one demonstrates a specific need for a weapon and then obtains the appropriate licence. In the negotiations for the new Law he felt a good job had been done. At an international level an impact assessment had been carried out re Maltese legislative, commerce and individual requirements. The Act itself introduced the classification of firearms, which was a new concept, and a legal classification of the use thereof. The question is asked “Why do you need a firearm?” Arms are divided into those which are prohibited and those which are allowed under a licence or by registration (based on UN and EU criteria), and the legally allowed use thereof. Supt. Zammit posed the rhetorical question “What can you go hunting for on Malta?” Birds and rabbits are the only local fauna, so a long Mauser rifle would not be needed for hunting on the islands. A shotgun or air rifle would be more appropriate. The result of these deliberations was the fastest law to have been passed through the Parliament unanimously. According to SALW control Malta is not considered to have an arms problem. The highest annual number of murders on Malta was eight, the lowest was nil. The use of arms in crime is not at all high but their availability may be a problem. Controls are imposed on arms imports and sales which under the old law were permitted without a stated reason. Now an arm may only be imported for a specific purpose. There are various controls, including the End User certificates and inspection of the dealer register. All licences are vetted at least twice, by the Police and by the Weapons Board. The applicant is also vetted by the club he/she is applying to join. All firearms are registered, including deactivated ones. The carrying and use of firearms is also regulated. Breaking the Law will result in heavy penalties. FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” - Hotel Le Meridien – Malta, 6th June 2008 However, there is always room for improvement. An amendment to permit shooting practice by minors is in the offing and a draft regulation controlling the reloading of cartridges is on the table. Proposals from FESAC would be welcome in view of our combined efforts to improve the Law. Supt. Zammit concluded by posing a question to the participants. Older firearms without serial numbers may pose a problem for the Police when tracing the owners especially in the event of them being recovered following a theft. Could they be marked with a special paint, or be fitted with a nonremovable seal? Mr. Vincent Borg, Vice President AMACS, felt that it would be preferable to introduce the notion of a digital macro photograph of a particular part of the firearm, thus producing a unique “fingerprint” of the metal structure, tool and wear marks or corrosion cavities. Would it not be simple to store such digital images, which are comparable to Police human fingerprint data? Supt. Zammit replied that there would be no data storage problem. He added that a macro photograph of for example the maker’s stamp would show up individual differences by way of the positioning, the depth of the stamp and so on. He mentioned that criminals have extreme difficulty in passing on stolen items when they are recorded. MR JOSEF FORMOSA GAUCI presented his Ministry’s views on promoting Cultural Tourism by taking advantage of what the Arms Act 2005 had to offer in this regard. Culture is now playing a bigger part in encouraging incoming tourism. It is not limited to the historical aspect but to all other local aspects. The EU strongly supports the promotion of cultural heritage. It is in great demand by tourists - thirty percent of tourist visits are due to a cultural aspect. It will grow to become one of the five key market segments in the future. Malta is a cradle of civilisation, with the oldest free-standing buildings in Europe. Over the previous fifty years development had created a sun and sea summer playground, lacking in cultural heritage. Given the physical restrictions on building space, the development plan for the next 20 years is to feature culture, replacing the low budget beach visitors with more affluent tourists, which will also diminish the effect of the seasonal factor. The target is to raise the number of cultural tourists from the current level of 158,000 to 238,000. Malta was put on the map by the Knights of St. John. They brought with them a European influence. They were in fact the guardians not only of Malta but also of Europe. Malta possesses a magnificent collection of their armour. Through October, November and December items of armour will feature in a special exhibition in the Musée de l’Armée in Paris. The MTA had supported historical reenactment of the period through the organisation of the “In Guardia” display which is held regularly at Fort St. Elmo in Valletta The arrival of the French in 1798 and the ensuing period presented another opportunity for the promotion of our historical heritage. There will soon be an exhibition on the French presence in Malta. The Historical Re-enactment Group of Malta (HRGM) had successfully tapped this interesting phase in history with their accurate Napoleonic re-enactment. Once again the MTA supported the initiative and another display called “Alarme” is a regular feature at Fort. St. Elmo. FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” - Hotel Le Meridien – Malta, 6th June 2008 Mr. Formosa Gauci explained that the Victorian period and the Second World War also have left their cultural impact. The National Trust (FWA) had successfully exploited the Victorian Fort Rinella where re-enactors use the correct period weapons and uniforms to attract tourists to the area. AMACS was involved in the earliest historical re-enactments in Malta (from 1989, according to Mr. Petroni), and is now promoting WWII re-enactment through its team of dedicated re-enactors. Mr. Formosa Gauci concluded by commenting that historical re-enactment and the use of firearms of the period were only feasible thanks to the introduction of updated regulations. Mr. Petroni stated that it was one of AMACS’ objectives to set up base in a historical military site in which it could organise exhibitions and re-enactment displays. THE HON. CLYDE PULI outlined the Administration’s commitment to Target Shooting Sports. He stated that building on the success of the Maltese Clay Shooters, it was planned to promote as many shooting disciplines as possible now that the Arms Act has made all this possible. The Act was in itself the result of close co-operation between the various stakeholders and it had gained international recognition as a sensible law which strikes the right balance between the sports shooter’s needs and the demands of security. Mr. Puli thanked AMACS for its years of hard work in pushing through the necessary changes. It was now imperative that all sports shooting organisations come together so that together with Government they will pave the way to the setting up and running of a national range complex. In this regard the Administration would consider all options. At this point Mr. Puli felt it necessary to remind these organisations of their responsibility to ensure that the proper vetting of target shooter licence applicants so that the high standard achieved by AMACS in this regard is maintained. Concluding, Mr. Puli tackled the bright prospects for sports tourism. The Administration believes in the idea of promoting Malta as centre for sports shooting in the Mediterranean region. Together we have to exploit the advantages offered by our climate, attractions and the drive of our dedicated shooters. Everyone stands to gain from this. Mr. Petroni thanked Mr. Puli for his clear stand. He added that the Weapons Board was currently reviewing three applications for private shooting ranges. All parties had an interest in seeing the permits issued as soon as possible provided all safety measures are in place. FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” - Hotel Le Meridien – Malta, 6th June 2008 At the conclusion of the Seminar Mr. Petroni presented mementoes to the guest speakers who were all applauded by the participants. He also thanked the other official guests who attended, namely Colonel David Mifsud and Captain Nick Cassar from the Armed Forces of Malta for their presence. ________________________ QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Q: Mr. Roger Cook of Great Britain expressed concern over a pan-European firearm register, given the recent embarrassing loss of personal data held on laptops which were left on public transport in the UK. How concerned were the local Police in Malta that sensitive security information on firearm collectors in Malta might fall into the hands of undesirable elements, through enforcement officials in other EU states failing to observe the same level of security as could be applied locally? A: Supt. Zammit responded that all firearm registration information would have to be encrypted. In addition, access was limited to only certain individuals and also by the number of enquiries which each individual could initiate. In Malta, an official needed a legal reason to access the data base. - Mrs. Kallenbach explained that there was a need for national databases which can communicate with each other. - Mr. Zammit confirmed that SIRENE already exists on this basis, but that Interpol was never fully integrated at a computer level. FESAC Seminar “The EU Arms Directive & the Malta Arms Act 2005” - Hotel Le Meridien – Malta, 6th June 2008 - Mr. Karstensen of Norway expressed his concern which was based on an actual case in Norway when a Police official tracked down elderly owners of valuable arms and approached them to sell their possessions. All agreed that databases needed to be closely monitored. ________________________ Q: Mr. Petroni stated that he would like to see the harmonisation of national laws with regard to the movement of arms. The security clearances were sufficient to allow for the easing of red tape however the wide variation between EU Member States’ regulations tended to represent a stumbling block for collectors. He asked whether there were any plans to try to harmonise national legislation. A: Mrs. Kallenbach replied that the Member States are not ready for harmonisation. Local legislation has come about because of their individual historical background. It also reflects individual incidents. But the European Firearm Pass should apply in the same way in each country, with each individual country remaining responsible for pre-checking. - Mrs. Papendorp commented that in the Netherlands the EFP works well. However, since collectors’ guns were not for shooting, collectors’ guns cannot be entered on an EFP. - Supt. Zammit mentioned that in France the EFP is based on the carnet de Chasse, which is solely a hunting permit. There are difficulties of translation, with each EU country applying the same legislation but in different ways. - Mrs Kallenbach stated that this issue needs to be resolved. The EFP should allow the movement of collectors’ guns. The Directive does not exclude this so we can apply to our respective authorities for permission, both for collectors and re-enactors. Adequate controls are already in place. ________________________ Q: Mr. Robert Brooker from the USA commented that decisions should always be based on data collection. The problem is the devil is always in the data. What was being done in the EU to analyse crime statistics? Mr. Karstensen added that in Norway a crime analysis concluded that virtually all crime was committed by illegal guns in the hands of illegal immigrants. Mrs. Papendorp reported that in the Netherlands such analysis was underway but would be difficult to interpret. A: Mrs Kallenbach acknowledged that most gun crimes were committed using illegal weapons. However, as a politician she still felt herself responsible for controlling as far as possible the misuse of legally held weapons as well. She asked what was the position regarding replica firearms? - Mr. Karstensen replied that in Norway only the original antique firearms are free from controls. - Mr. Rae Wills from the UK described the opinion of the Director of the St. Etienne Proof House, to the effect that the reactivation of deactivated firearms was already catered for under existing legislation. Mr Wills acknowledged that reactivation was a minor problem, but felt it did not call for a new law. He asked if there was any evidence of widespread misuse. Mr Petroni acknowledged this as a good observation.