SOUTH AFRICAN ANIMAL LAW REVIEW CONSULTATION WORKSHOP

Chairperson’s Summary

Download the document in Adobe Acrobat Reader

1. On 13 August 2009, Animal Rights Africa (ARA), with the financial support of Dr Felix Schneier and the Mones Michaels Trust, convened a workshop in Johannesburg, South Africa, to discuss the desirability and feasibility of developing and enacting new animal protection legislation in South Africa.

2. The workshop was the first consultative gathering of the animal protection sector on animal legislation in South Africa.

3. In order to enable frank exploration of the issues and practical proposals, the workshop was conducted in English and with a number of ”ground rules” which aimed to ensure open, respectful dialogue, and maximum participation.

4. This Summary Report, which has been prepared by the overall Chairperson of the Workshop, provides a brief overview of the themes discussed and its outcomes, and is in no way reflective of all views articulated during the meeting. The author of this report thus bears sole responsibility for its contents.

Participants and Presenters

5. The workshop brought together a total of some 80 participants from the animal rights, welfare and protection community, who on a daily basis work with, and for, domestic, wild and farmed animals in South Africa, including, delegates from the following organisations: Animal Anti-Cruelty League, Animal Rights Africa, Baboon Matters, Bataleurs, Beauty Without Cruelty(SA), Border Collie Rescue, CatPals, Community Led Animal Welfare (CLAW), Earthlife Africa, EduPet, EWT (Law and Policy Group), Four Paws, Freeme, Friends of the Cat, Fur Free, Hartebeesport Animal Welfare Society (HAWS), Highveld Horse Care Unit, Husky Rescue Society, Irwins Animal Rescue Centre, Jane Goodall Institute - South Africa, Kitten Action, Leopard Conservation Project, Monkey Helpline and Animal Rescues Unlimited, National Council of SPCAs (NSPCA), Society for Animals in Distress, South African Guide Dogs Association for the Blind, Township Animal Rescue, Wet Nose Animal Rescue Centre, and Wolfshaven.

6. In addition, a number of independent Wild Life experts and animal protection practitioners, management consultants, students and lawyers attended, including the South African Law Reform Commission.

7. Apologies for not being able to attend and/or provide a presentation of their views and work were received by inter alia, the Department of Agriculture (under which most, if not all, relevant legislation falls), the South African Police Service (SAPS), Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, the Democratic Alliance’s spokesperson on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Johannesburg City Safety Programme, Karen Trendler and Four Paws.

8. Presenters and speakers (some of whom were also participants) included: Dr David Bilchitz (Director, South African Institute for Advanced Constitutional, Public, Human Rights & International Law), Cormac Cullinan (Director: Cullinan & Associates), Dugan Fraser (Public & Development Management Consultant), Michele Pickover and Steve Smit (ARA), Sven Kreher (Bataleurs), Charlotte Nikschtat & Sandra Gore (Bowman Gilfillan Attorneys), Mariann Sullivan (American Bar Association, Animal Law Committee), Cora Bailey (CLAW) & Dr Magdie Van Heerden (Human Animal Interaction Specialist).

Aims and Objectives

9. The workshop was initiated in order to:
  • Identify gaps and challenges (including loopholes) in South Africa’s current legislation and enforcement
  • Discuss strategies towards addressing such gaps and challenges
  • Lobby for not merely changing the law but changing the law for the better
  • Lend urgency to the task of addressing the wrong done to animals in South Africa.
10. The broad objective of the workshop was thus to discuss the desirability and feasibility of developing and enacting new animal protection legislation in South Africa.

11. The aims of the workshop were thus to:
  • Assess current legislation in South Africa that aims to serve the interests of animals
  • Assess the current global and national context (including new ethical norms and constitutional provisions) that may inhibit or facilitate more progressive South African legislation
  • Explore the feasibility of developing and enacting new animal protection legislation in South Africa
  • Develop, if agreed, a national co-ordinated process through which more thorough and comprehensive animal welfare and protection legislation in South Africa could be drafted and to devise a strategic plan to take this process forward.

Themes Discussed

12. Topics presented, were discussed and debated, under the following themes:

  • Philosophical and conceptual shifts required by the South African Constitution under the current dispensation
  • Results of a gap analysis of South African legislation (questionnaire report back)
  • Strategic and practical issues to be considered when seeking to achieve law reform in South Africa
  • International comparisons and best practices
  • The USA experience of legislation and enforcement: lessons learned
  • General environmental legislation in South Africa and animal welfare
  • The link between animal abuse and domestic abuse
  • Challenges of implementing South African animal welfare and protection legislation
  • Strategies to address the current situation in South Africa and possible challenges that might arise
  • The way forward.
13. It should be noted that throughout the day the positive aspects, adequacy and shortcomings of a number of pieces of legislation currently in force in South Africa, including, and in particular, the Animals Protection Act, 1962 (Act 71 of 1962) and the Performing Animals Protection Act, 1935 (Act 24 of 1935) as well as the Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1993 (Act 169 of 1993) which governs the operations and management of animal welfare organisations, were interrogated.

14. In addition and importantly, the current weaknesses, and possible solutions, in respect of enforcement capacities of, for example, the SAPS, the judicial system and animal organisations to implement and make use of the above mentioned laws were also discussed and debated under each of the themes listed above.

Summary Conclusions

15. By the end of the day, there was sufficient consensus amongst participants that:
  1. While there is an obvious need to continue working on public educational programmes and to increase our rehabilitation, rescue, sanctuary, policy advocacy work etc, legislative reform in South Africa is both necessary and long overdue;
  2. South Africa’s apartheid legacy, its unique transition process and its existing transformation agenda, all provide an unique opportunity for more progressive animal protection legislation to be drafted and enacted;
  3. South Africa’s (1996) Constitution and dispensation of “participatory democracy” also provides an important and somewhat favourable framework in which this change can take place;
  4. The current global crisis of climate change and food insecurity and recent advancements in the scientific understanding of animals as well as the promulgation of more progressive policies and laws in other countries also present a useful context in which to locate the need for urgent legislative change in South Africa;
  5. There is now strong scientific evidence reflecting the link between violence perpetrated by humans against humans and humans against animals (this is important given the current levels of violent crime in South Africa today);
  6. While some sectors of South African society have problematic cultural and traditional norms and values, respect for other life forms and in particular animals is deeply rooted in African philosophy and religious and ethical practises in other sectors;
  7. It was both necessary and feasible for animal rightists, animal welfarists, animal conservationists and animal protectionists in South Africa to work together to develop and achieve new animal protection legislation in South Africa – these perceived opposing views can complement each other and unite to achieve the common goal of transforming the law.

16. However, it was also noted that the achievement of new legislation would be a challenging task given that, inter alia:
  1. This initiative may be perceived as ‘white/northern’ driven amongst some sectors of South African society (and other stakeholders with vested interests may exploit this);
  2. It may be a lengthy and expensive exercise;
  3. There is a potential conflict of interest within the Department of Agriculture (under which most, if not all, relevant legislation falls) - being both stakeholder and referee;
  4. There is currently a proliferation of relevant legislation (such as the Animals Protection Act, 1962 (Act 71 of 1962), the Performing Animals Protection Act, 1935 (Act 24 of 1935) and the Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1993 (Act 169 of 1993) that need to be thoroughly examined;
  5. There are weak linkages between other more general environmental legislation (such as the National Environmental Management Act and the Biodiversity Act) and animal protection and welfare laws and ordinances;
  6. The is often a disparity between South Africa’s world-class progressive legislation in other areas and the capacity of the authorities to monitor, implement and enforce such legislation;
  7. South Africa has a powerful and vocal animal use industry.
17. It was thus agreed that a well thought-out Strategic Plan was needed which takes into account the issues raised during the presentations and the discussions as well as the opportunities and challenges noted above, including:
  1. The range of issues that need to be taken up (from “budgies to elephants”);
  2. The need for a constructive and professional critique of existing relevant legislation and implementation and enforcement capacities;
  3. A comparative review and analysis of legislation and best practise internationally and in particular in developing countries similar to South Africa;
  4. The need for a multi-faceted approach given the variety of possible routes that could be followed in getting new laws in place in South Africa (such the Constitutional Court, the Law Reform Commission, the relevant national and provincial Parliamentary fora and structures, the ruling party and opposition, the Ministries of Agriculture and Justice etc);
  5. The need for a two-pronged approach in the short to medium term, in other words, to try and make better use of existing laws and regulations and enforcement procedures while at the same time working on totally new legislation;
  6. Dialogue to be actively initiated with the Department of Agriculture;
  7. The development of a communication/media strategy with the relevant animal rights, welfare and protection community;
  8. The need to develop an engagement and educational strategy with both the general public and in particular the public who use or interact with animals on a daily basis as well as being aimed at prosecutors, magistrates, police officers etc;
  9. The need for a litigation strategy.

18. In conclusion, it was agreed that a Task Team or Forum was need to develop and implement the Strategic Plan:
  1. The Task Team/Forum was mandated to take the process further and to co-opt other members and/or consultants if necessary;

  2. The Task Team/Forum selected consists of:
    1. Dr David Bilchitz
    2. Ms Michele Pickover
    3. Mr Sven Kreher
    4. Mr Steve Smit
    5. Ms Karen Trendler

19. Finally, participants expressed their appreciation to the organisers, and in particular, Katherine Townshend and Michele Pickover, as well as to their fellow participants for their valuable presentations and inputs. The Workshop was deemed a useful and very important first step towards the creation of new animal protection legislation in South Africa.

Download the document in Adobe Acrobat Reader