Academics at the Harvard Law School are expected to apply this week to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, to be added as friends of the court in the ongoing legal battle to release three elephants from the Johannesburg Zoo.

Animal Law Reform South Africa, the EMS Foundation and Khoi Chief Stephen Fritz have asked the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, to order their confinement to be unconstitutional.

The court case has meanwhile gained international attention from Harvard academics, who want to join the matter to highlight the elephants’ complex needs and the broader ethical implications.

The applicants in the main application argue that South African law recognises that animals are sentient beings, capable of suffering and experiencing pain.

According to the groups and Fritz, animals have intrinsic value as individuals and that intrinsic value is a central rationale for their protection.

”South African law recognises that the protection of animals is intrinsically linked to the moral status of humans … The welfare of animals including those in captivity and conversation are inextricably intertwined and together form part of the section 24 right and the values underpinning the Constitution,” they argued.

Section 24 of the Constitution states that everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being and to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures.

The measures prevent pollution and ecological degradation, promote conservation and secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.

Animal Law Reform SA, EMS Foundation and Fritz believe that the elephants are being kept at the Johannesburg Zoo in conditions that are adverse to their welfare and wellbeing.

Professor Kristen Stilt and Dr Montes Franchesini at Harvard’s Law School’s Brooks McCormick animal law and policy programme are experts in the field of captive animal welfare and law, which they want to share with the court in this case.

They feel that it is in the interest of justice that their voices be heard before the court determined on the issue of whether the animal should be released from captivity at the zoo or not. The academic said they have done detailed legal research into this topic and will argue that their voices are vital to decide the fate of the three elephants – Lammie, Mopane and Ramadiba.

The academic’s aim is to make submissions on international and comparative law and will address the global movement towards expanding legal safeguards for animals and nature. They will also address the protection of elephants globally and efforts to free them from captivity in zoos.

The academics will argue that given the novelty of this case under South African law, and the complexity of international and foreign law, the court will benefit from their input.

While the Johannesburg Zoo has denied that the elephants are in distress and in their court papers gave the assurance that these elephants are being well cared for, it acknowledges that that input by the Harvard academics would be of assistance to the court when it has to make a ruling in the main application.

zelda.venter@inl.co.za

Source link