Author:Jaivardhan Singh Rathore, student at National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam
Introduction
In India, the issue of animal rights resides in a special moral and legal arena that has emerged on account of reverence for the animal. Animals have been, and continue to be, an important part of Indian culture, which sets the stage for a legal paradigm change regarding animal rights. The moral value of compassion towards all living creatures has its roots in the age-old, Indian principle of ahimsa (non-violence), and has been longstanding in the traditions of Hindus, Buddhists, and Jains. The modern legal application of animal protection, however, only commenced following India’s independence, as society began to transition from a religious understanding of animal welfare to a rights-based concept of welfare. Article 48A and Article 51A(g) of the Indian Constitution imposes duties on both the State and citizens to protect and have compassion for animals; therefore, there is a Constitutional framework for animal rights in India. Further, over time the judiciary has applied Article 21, which recognizes the right to life, to non-human life as well. In “Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja” (2014), society and the judiciary granted the designation of “sentient beings” to animals, elevating their rights even further. Despite these judicial movements towards increased animal rights, the gap between legislative intentions and practical implementation can still be quite significant. Today, the normalization of animal rights, without an animal rights or welfare movement in the country, is exemplified in the tussle between tradition, capitalism interests, and constitutional morality, and it is time for a seminal move to increase the ecological consciousness and compassion of the Indian legal framework and professionals alike.
Constitutional Framework for Animal Rights
The Constitution of India provides a strong moral and legal basis for the protection of animals in conformity with the deep-rooted attitude of sympathy and co-existence. Though animals are not mentioned as rights-bearing entities in the Constitution, their protection exists by virtue of the Directive Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Duties. “Article 48A” introduced by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976 enjoins the State to “protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country”. In furtherance of this “Article 51A(g)” enjoins upon every citizen a fundamental duty “to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures”. These provisions enjoin both a duty on the State and society to help animals.
The judiciary has played an active role in giving expansive meaning to these constitutional ideals. In “Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja (2014)” the Supreme Court of India recognized that “Article 21” which guarantees the right to life extended to all living creatures, by which in turn animals are given the right to live with dignity and freedom from unnecessary pain. Similarly, in “Centre for Environmental Law v. Union of India (2013)”, the Court recognized the duty upon the State to protect wildlife as being part of the natural heritage of the country. Such interpretations by the judiciary have shifted the Indian jurisprudence from an anthropocentric (i.e. that man is the centre of the universe) approach to an eco-centric one in which all forms of life have value on their own. Thus, the Constitution, as interpreted by the courts, is both the moral and legal basis
Legal Jargon (Statuary Framework Governing Animal Rights in India)
The statutory framework with respect to animal rights in India derives its main source from the “Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (PCA Act)” and the “Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972” read with a number of subordinate rules and regulations provided for in them. The PCA Act was enacted to replace the 1890 Act of the British era and seek to prevent unnecessary suffering and cruelty to animals. It provides for the establishment of the “Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI)”, which is entrusted with the duty of implementing various animal welfare policies, developing public awareness of humanitarian ways, and providing advice to the government of India. Sections 11 to 20 of the Act enumerate the various types of cruelty such as beating, overloading, neglect, etc., which are punishable under the Act. The penalties, however, are of a nominal, if not a trifling, nature, as they can vary only from Rs. 10 to Rs. 100 for the first offence. The deterrent the Act had in view is therefore all but lost. The “Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972” provides a stricter regime for the protection of wild animals and regulates hunting, trading in wild animals and their habitat. They are divided in six schedules and the animals provided for in Schedule I are given the highest protection, that is, protection from hunting, trading in the animals and their habitat, etc.
There are also rules such as “Performing Animals (Registration) Rules, 2001”, “Rules for transport of Animals 1978”, “Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001”, and so on, which relate to individual welfare concerns. But notwithstanding the elaborate framework that exists on paper in law, the enforcement machinery is extremely weak in India as sufficient resources are not available, there is no co-ordination between the various functions of the different agencies, and in many respects social indifference remains. The statutory framework, notwithstanding its good intentions, is in need of an immediate overhaul and its provisions, especially in the PCA Act, require to be brought up to date to comprehend the modern concept of animals having sentience, rights, welfare, etc. to bring India into line with international standards in animal protection.
Key Case Laws concerning Animal Rights in India
Judicial intervention plays a significant role in shaping the narrative of animal rights in India by filling various legislative and administrative voids through progressive interpretations.
The landmark judgment in ‘Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja, (2014)’ exemplifies a watershed moment. The Supreme Court prohibited the bull-taming event known as ‘Jallikattu’, acknowledging animals as “sentient beings” who had the right to live a dignified life under ‘Article 21’ of the Constitution. The Court then enunciated the Five Freedoms of Animals i.e. freedom from hunger, freedom from pain, freedom from fear, freedom from discomfort and freedom to express normal behaviour, as essential aspects of animal welfare. Jurisprudentially this marked a shift from a “welfare” paradigm to a rights-based approach. In ‘Centre for Environmental Law v. Union of India’ (2013) the Supreme Court reiterated the obligation of the State to protect wildlife as part of the natural heritage of this country. The Court emphasized the need for an eco-centric approach as opposed to a purely anthropocentric approach.
Likewise, in ‘People for Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Union of India’ (2012), the Court prohibited the use of animals for testing cosmetics stating that there were scientific substitutes to cruelty and also on the ground of ethical considerations. The High Courts have also played a significant role in upholding animal protection with the proactive interpretation.
The Kerala High Court in ‘N.R. Nair v. Union of India’ (2000) upheld the restrictions on performing animals, while the Uttarakhand High Court in Narayan Dutt Bhatt v. Union of India (2018) went to the extent of declaring all animals as “legal persons”. It is clear from this batch of judgments, that the judiciary is committed to recognize animals as rights bearing entities, entitled to compassion and protection under the Constitution.
Recommendations and Way Forward
Animal rights in India have a reasonable constitutional and statutory basis, but the shortcomings are poor enforcement, archaic laws, and a lack of public awareness. Legal reform is required to remove these weaknesses, and it should be all-embracing. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act of 1960 should be amended forthwith so that it has greater and more effectively punishing measures, it should be made to apply to wider meanings of cruelty which should include recognition of animal sentience, animals should be raised to legal personhood so that legally enforceable rights are made available to them (this has already been adopted by some High Courts). The institutions such as the Animal Welfare Board of India and the State Animal Welfare Boards must be given greater autonomy, funds and accountability. There should be constituted a National Animal Protection Authority, which could enforce its orders/make them applicable to all parties, which could smoothen inter-agency co-ordination which would eventually lead to compliance. Police and veterinary training would also have to be bettered in quality and content for efficient organisation of investigation and prosecution of cases of animal cruelty. Participatory measures would also have to be taken for the people on lines of education, awareness measures, and inclusion of animal ethics in the syllabi of schools. Co-ordination with NGOs, local population, through digital technology for peering into illegal trade, transport, slaughter through management of constituent establishments is also to be initiated. India also has to co-ordinate its policy with UDAW, OIE Animal Welfare Guidelines etc. Policies must be extended in a more rounded manner to a better understanding of eco-centric shield, than anthropocentric philosophies of law in which, animal protection does not become a matter of charity but becomes an imperative enshrined in the law as a constitutional obligation to ensure a just and humane society.
Conclusion
The animal rights movement in India demonstrates that the means of justice and compassion must not stop with man, but should go further. Our Constitution (through Articles 48A & 51A (g)) and through judicial interpretation of Article 21, gives a rich ethical and legal base to view animals as sentient beings for their protection. But the gap in the enforcement and the out-dated statutes and apathy all round work against the attainment of the blessed ideals so necessary. The river of judicial interpretation has flowed a long way to recognize animals as being entitled to rights. To effect constant reform of such great area necessitates the application of a balance of cultural practices, economic realities and moral duties. To see that this compassion contained in the Constitution is reflected in practical protection to animals it is necessary for the legal, institutional and public awareness schemes to be carried out. To protect animal rights is not only a legal obligation but it is a reflection, of the civilisational ethos of India and the adherence to its part of mutual existence, compassion and ecological balance during a time that demands increasingly inclusive vision of justice as well.
FAQs
1. What are the principal laws for protection of animals in India?
The principal laws in India for the protection of animals are passed under the auspices of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 which prohibits cruelty (and neglect) to animals, and under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 which protects wild animals and wild habitats. Other laws, such as the Performing Animals (Registration) Rules, 2001; the Rules for Transport of Animals, 1978; and the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001 deal with specific details of performances, transport, and stray animal population control.
2. How does the Constitution protect animal welfare?
The Constitution directs that humane treatment of animals should be promoted by stating in Article 48A that “the State shall endeavour to protect the wild life and to have compassion for living creatures.” Article 51A(g) lays it down as a “fundamental duty” of every citizen to “have compassion for all living creatures.” Article 21 of the Constitution has been judicially interpreted to include within the right to life, the welfare and dignity of animals, to treat them as sentient beings.
3. What reforms are required to strengthen animal rights laws in India?
Reforms are required, inter alia, in the following areas, the first being for amending the PCA Act, 1960 to increase the penalties and to recognize sentience in animals; the second to create a National Animal Protection Authority to ensure better enforcement; and the third is the promotion of education and awareness regarding the rights of animals among the public. It is also necessary for Indian law to comply with international standards so that the humane treatment of animals and ecocentrism will be more than merely one of the norms of human governance as indicated by the Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare (UDAW) for which India is a signatory.
