Animal Law Consultation Workshop: A Good Start
Almost a month ago, on 13 Aug, I attended a Workshop organised by Animal Rights Africa where the subject matter was the Animal Legislation in South Africa and how it can be improved or alternatively reengineered. I was very impressed with the professional manner in which the day was managed and the presentations, for the most part, were were both interesting and informative. My congratulations to the team at ARA.
Should you wish to review the day’s presentations and discussions, a full summary is available on the ARA website: http://www.animalrightsafrica.org/APA/welcome.php
While I was most impressed with the knowledge and expertise of many of the presenters, and a special mention should be made here of Dr David Bilchitz, I was aware throughout the day that much time was spent on underlying philosophy. While I will always support the notion that any approach to change in any environment must have a sound philosophical base, I do think that there are times when Principle must, if it is to maintain relevance and achieve results in the short-to-medium term, bow to Pragmatism.
It is here that I have three reservations with the way forward as decided by the group:
1.The Task Team contains no representation from those who work in Domestic Animal Rescue and Welfare, arguably the sector of the animal community is greatest need at this time. In effect it means that knowledge gained ‘on the ground’ may not be incorporated into the thinking in respect of Strategy Development. The Real World presents difficulties that are not immediately evident to those dealing with matters of principle.
2. I offered – as I have before, and repeat that offer now – to provide an online forum on which issues relevant to the legislation may be discussed, and it was very quickly swept under the carpet. My reasoning for wanting to do so is as follows:
a. The logistics of getting inputs from all those interested in these issues present an updating and coordinating nightmare and everyone is already stretched in respect of resources. An online forum is updated automatically by the input from each member, and very little manual coordination is required
b. Transparency is a necessary component of the process – if the Task Team is seen to be headed in the wrong direction, the opportunity should be available for members of the community to table their disagreement. In addition, members of the animal-loving community have a right to know while things are happening, not by virtue of a report after the fact.
c. Where there is an online forum, there is no need to update or distribute information to people new to the process – they merely need visit the online forum to get up to date on the status of any dicussion.
3. While I myself am supportive of the Animal Rights Movement, I do not believe that this Forum should necessarily identify itself with Rights, and should perhaps focus on Outcomes rather than a philosophical ‘position’. I am not sure this is the case, this is merely a caveat.
On a final note, the presentation that had the greatest impact on me personally – and those of you who know me well will recognise that I am no easy target for the emotional ‘sucker punch’ – was that of Cora Bailey of CLAW, who spoke with hearfelt conviction of her experiences with people and their animals in the townships. It is here where our greatest challenge lies and it is here we must contextualise this legal battle, not in the world of high ideas, but in the world of animals and people in pain.
A Light in their Darkness
Derek
Hopeful Homeless
Comments