As for the militia exception - would that be a realistic approach? According to the directive, a state must have had the practice of transferering firearms to militia members in place for 50 years, which would not be the case in CZ as far is I know?
The Czech plan is not to rely on the Swiss militia exception, rather to rely on the combo of the Primary EU law (treaties) exception for national security and exception in he gun ban directive that relates to the security purposes, i.e. Article 6(2) of
the Directive:
For the protection of the security of critical infrastructure, commercial shipping, high-value convoys and sensitive premises, as well as for national defence, educational, cultural, research and historical purposes, and without prejudice to paragraph 1, the national competent authorities may grant, in individual cases, exceptionally and in a duly reasoned manner, authorisations for firearms, essential components and ammunition classified in category A where this is not contrary to public security or public order.
And of the
Treaty on the European Union:
Art. 4(2):
The Union shall respect the equality of Member States before the Treaties as well as their national identities, inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government. It shall respect their essential State functions, including ensuring the territorial integrity of the State, maintaining law and order and safeguarding national security. In particular, national security remains the sole responsibility of each Member State.
And the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union:
Art. 72:
This Title shall not affect the exercise of the responsibilities incumbent upon Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security.
Art. 276:
In exercising its powers regarding the provisions of Chapters 4 and 5 of Title V of Part Three relating to the area of freedom, security and justice, the Court of Justice of the European Union shall have no jurisdiction to review the validity or proportionality of operations carried out by the police or other law-enforcement services of a Member State or the exercise of the responsibilities incumbent upon Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security.
I.e. the argument is that our shall issue concealed carry system with large number of licenses having been issued puts the Czech Republic in unique position to allow us to claim that gun owners are essential part of safeguarding internal security and thus outside of scope of authority of EU law altogether. Failing that, then the argument stands they have all been issued respective authorization under Art 6(2) of the Directive.
Which is better than Swiss solution, because:
1) It allows for national rules regarding all A cat firearms (the Swiss exemption covers only full-autos changed into semi-autos - not PDW and not magazine limitation - which will hopefully create s--tstorm once the Swiss realize that).
2) Might actually lead to relaxing of rules for A cat firearms in general (wishful thinking, ain't gonna happen).
In reality it all hangs upon the autumn election. The new law will be drafted by new government. Having the Constitutional Amendment passed would be great in that it would put higher requirements on the new government. But in any case - if get pro-gun government, they will use threat of terrorism as excuse to cut corners around the Directive (and appeal to voters), if anti-gun, they will use Directive as excuse to tighten the screws.
A scenario that may not be unlikely would be government striking informal deal with Commission - Czech Republic takes back the suit and Commission let's us slide with our own interpretation of Directive implementation. I don't think that Commission could risk having the Directive stricken down as it is it's flagship in fight against terrorism.
On the issue you mentioned earlier - great to hear about the "other side", as the reports in english and german are pretty streamlined sadly. In media reports, I only saw single sided views about the comission launching a suit for breach of contract against CZ, PL and HU, but no mention of the CZ-government wanting to cooperate and being obstructed by Greece and Italy. Who knows why...
Well to be fair I wouldn't suspect our government to be overly cooperative in that matter either. But the fact is that the two countries failed to provide any assistance at all. Their idea was: here is a train with 2.000 people, take them and don't ask any questions. Thanks but no thanks.
Oh, did you hear that one that most of the migrants accepted under quota system to Luxembourg are ... nobody knows where in the EU, but definitely not in Luxembourg?
Oh, did you hear that out of the first airplane with 80 Christians that the Czech Republic voluntarily flew from Iraq and gave them asylum, 40 ran to Germany within a month, and 20 of those actually received asylum therein (leading to premature cancellation of the Iraqi asylum Christians system)?
Oh, did you hear that up to 400 refugees were supposed to be moved to the Czech Republic from camps in Jordan, but when Obama administration announced it will be accepting refugees, all of those pre-selected by Czech officials canceled their applications and filed for US (red cross allowed only one country choice), leading to premature cancellation of the system?
I could go on but I think I went off topic quite enough.
Anyway, good news at the end: Estonia, which will chair the EU presidency for the next half-a-year, already voiced its opposition against the Commission's plan to sanction Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary for the quota refusal. We will see if Germany will be able to whip the Estonians as effectively as they managed with Slovaks.
Does it need to be a direct transfer to "militia members"? As I understand it, there are a great many surplus military firearms (vz. 58, etc.) that are now owned by Czech citizens... I wonder if that could somehow be used to satisfy that requirement?
This is the wording:
As regards firearms classified in point 6 of category A, Member States applying a military system based on general conscription and having in place over the last 50 years a system of transfer of military firearms to persons leaving the army after fulfilling their military duties may grant to those persons, in their capacity as a target shooter, an authorisation to keep one firearm used during the mandatory military period. The relevant public authority shall transform those firearms into semi-automatic firearms and shall periodically check that the persons using such firearms do not represent a risk to public security. The provisions set out in points (a), (b) and (c) of the first subparagraph shall apply.
There is no other state than Switzerland in Europe meeting this requirement. And yes, it has to be transfer of military firearms to persons leaving army after fulfilling military duties.
We abolished conscription in 2003, most people getting their vz.58 now have never served.
Last but not least: Despite the fact that the grandfathering clause closed yesterday:
Member States may decide to confirm, renew or prolong authorisations for semi-automatic firearms classified in point 6, 7 or 8 of category A in respect of a firearm which was classified in category B, and lawfully acquired and registered, before 13 June 2017, subject to the other conditions laid down in this Directive. Furthermore, Member States may allow such firearms to be acquired by other persons authorised by Member States in accordance with this Directive, as amended by Directive (EU) 2017/853 of the European Parliament and of the Council
gun shops are reporting that the gun buying spree end is nowhere in sight. Even if anti-gun government gets into power after autumn election, this will put them into precarious position. Quite clearly they can't risk sticking to the Directive grandfathering deadline even if they wish to. If for not other reason than because the 40.000 cops can't cope with 100.000 people coming to stations in the same morning and filing all their guns lost (presuming that only 1/3 would pissed enough to do that).