By Bhumika Sharma and Dr. Jaswant Singh
The basis of granting non-human beings with rights can be traced in culture, tradition, religion and ethology. The need to show compassion to all living creatures can be seen even in one of the most sacred Hindu scriptures. He is a perfect yogi who, by comparison to his own self, sees the true equality of all beings, both in their happiness and distress. (Bhagavad Gita VI, 32).
Drawing inspiration from it, the Constitution of India under Part-IV and Part-IVA imposes duties upon the State as well as citizens to respect even the non-human beings. The environment includes various species of flora and fauna as living components. The environment as a whole must be given respect, care and protection as human lives are totally dependent upon it for survival.
The philosophy of Sustainable Development and vision for the rights of future generation also underline the need to treat environment in non-harmful manner. The rights of animals, birds and other species do not only arise on being subject to clinical experimentation, as performing animals, as wildlife but also as domestic and abandoned creatures.
The Five Freedoms
The Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Animals (kept under Intensive Livestock Husbandry Systems), commonly known as the Brambell Report of December 1965 (England), was seminal work on recognizing freedoms for animals. These freedoms define ideal states, forming a comprehensive framework for welfare of animals.
- Freedom from hunger or thirst.
- Freedom from discomfort.
- Freedom from pain, injury or disease.
- Freedom to express most normal behaviour.
- Freedom from fear and distress.
These freedoms thus grant animals with rights such as ready access to fresh water and a diet for proper health; shelter and a comfortable resting area; prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment; and company of the animal’s own kind etc.
The animals have been categorized into Companion Animals (dogs, cats, horses, birds, rabbits, goats, gerbils, snakes, rats, mice, fish etc.); farm animals (horse, sheep, buffalo etc.); marine life; and wildlife (golden cat, wild pig, snakes, lions, tigers etc.). Depending upon the category, different freedoms and rights are granted to the animals. But the basic rights are common to all of them.
Similarly the rights of animals when used in experimentation have been time and again emphasized. Russell and Burch’s 3R’s i.e. replacement of animals in research with alternatives; reduction in the number of animals used in experiments; and refinement of the care and treatment of the animals who continue to be used in research, testing and education are the three principles of treating animals in experimentation.
Unfortunately, responsiveness for non-human animals is still to gain acceptance in the world where even humans are not treated humanely. India has achieved a substantive accomplishment for the animal rights movement with protective constitutional inclusion for their rights.
A number of protective legislations are in existence in India. These statutory provisions mandate to treat animals, birds and other non-human beings humanely.
The Cattle Preservation and Development Committee under the chairmanship of Sardar Datar Singh in 1947–48 suggested the role of Gaushalas, Cattle Protection Societies and Salvage Centres for preserving cattle wealth. Article 51(g) and (h) of the Constitution of India are magna carta for protecting the life of animals.
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 was the earliest legislation in independent India to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on animals. It has to be read with allied Rules enacted by virtue of power vested under Section 38, such as the Experiments on Animals (Control and Supervision) Rules, 1968 and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Slaughter House) Rules, 2001.
The Ministry of Environment and Forests, regarding ban on use of animals, issued a notification dated 11-7-2011 to ban five animals namely bears, monkeys, tigers, panthers, lions and bulls to be used for exhibiting or training as performing animals.
Section 2(a) defines animal as any living creature other than a human being. The Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 has been passed for the protection of wild animals, birds and plants. Section 2(1) defines animal as amphibians, birds, mammals and reptiles, and their young, and also includes, in the cases of birds and reptiles, their eggs.
Section 2(37) defines wildlife as any animal, bees, butterflies, crustacean, fish and moths; and aquatic or land vegetation which forms part of any habitat. Section 2(36) defines wild animal as any animal found wild in nature and includes any animal specified in Schedule I, Schedule II, Schedule III, Schedule IV or Schedule V, wherever found.
In Law Commission of India Report No. 261, 2015, it was recommended that the Central Government must seriously regulate the trade in pet shops, and practices followed in dog breeding and aquarium fish breeding. The rules regarding pet shops, dog breeding, and aquarium fish breeding clearly fall within and have a rational nexus to the object and purpose of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
Dog Breeding, Marketing and Sale Rules, 2010; Aquarium Fish Breeding and Marketing Rules; and Pet Shop Rules, 2010 as drafted by Animal Welfare Board of India may be passed by the Parliament.
Judicial Recognition of Animal Rights
The Indian judiciary has been responsive to the voice, pain and sufferings of non-human beings. It has advocated and issued directions to ensure their welfare. Courts have a duty under the doctrine of parens patriae to take care of the rights of animals, since they are unable to take care of themselves as against human beings.
In Mohd. Hanif Quareshi and others v. State of Bihar, AIR 1958 SC 731, it was held that the sacrifice on Bakr-Id day is not an obligatory overt act for a Mussalman to exhibit his religious belief and idea and consequently, there was no violation of the fundamental rights of the Mussalmans under Article 25(1) of the Indian Constitution.
In State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat and Others, (2005) 8 SCC 534, this Court held that by enacting Article 51A(g), Articles 48 and 48-A have to be read along with Sections 3, 11(1)(e) & (m), 22 etc. of the PCA Act.
In Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja and others, (2014) 7 SCC 547, it was observed by the Apex Court that animal welfare laws have to be interpreted keeping in mind the welfare of animals and species’ best interest subject to just exceptions out of human necessity.
Further, the Apex Court was of the view that the rituals attached to animal sacrifice reflect only cruelty, superstition, fear and barbarism and has nothing to do with either religion or culture. The sacrifice of animals in the presence of other animals often fills them with fear and dread and becomes a very depressing and painful sight to watch.
Further it was held that every species has an inherent right to live. So far as animals are concerned, life means something more than mere survival or existence or instrumental value for human beings, but to lead a life with some intrinsic worth, honour and dignity.
Bulls cannot be used as performing animals for Jallikattu and Bullock-cart Race, since they are basically draught and pack animals, not anatomically designed for such performances. The Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009 was held repugnant to the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
AWBI and Governments were directed to take appropriate steps to see that the persons-in-charge or care of animals take reasonable measures to ensure the well being of animals. AWBI and Governments were directed to take steps to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on the animals, since their rights have been statutorily protected under Sections 3 and 11 of PCA Act.
In Ramesh Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, on 26.9.2014, the HP High Court issued mandatory directions prohibiting/banning animal/bird sacrifice in the temples and public places.
In People for Animals petition, the Delhi High Court (May 17, 2015) held that birds have the fundamental right to live with dignity and fly in the sky without being kept in cages or subjected to cruelty. It was further held that running their trade was a violation of their rights. Human beings have no right to keep them in small cages for the purposes of their business or otherwise.
After the number of liberal interpretations of the animal welfare questions, unfortunately the Supreme Court on September 28, 2015 declined to entertain a writ petition seeking to regulate animal sacrifice during religious festivals. The practice of slaughter in the name of animal sacrifice carried out by devotees of various religions/cults/beliefs throughout the territory of India was challenged before the Court.
At international and national levels, a number of celebrations take place to mark the duties to protect the non-human beings. World Day for Laboratory Animals is celebrated on 24 April; World Wildlife Day on 3 March; World Whale Day on 14 February 2015 and World Migratory Bird Day (WMBD) on the second weekend of May every year.
The largest movement in the direction of animal protections is marked by World Animal Day, celebrated on 4 October, raising the status of animals in order to improve welfare standards. It started in 1931 at a convention of ecologists in Florence to highlight the plight of endangered species. Let us unite and join these animal welfare movements. The participation in awareness-raising campaigns as well as adopting animal-friendly behaviour are the smallest measures that can be taken to treat them justly.