FOREWORD
This Book of seven Chapters which deals with Legal Framework For Animal Rights And Game Management In Nigeria is unique in the sense that as far as I know, this is the first major work in Nigeria
The author has shown a good grasp of the subject matter of this Book by rightly observing at the outset as follows:
“One may wonder a little whether the concept of duty and right that is peculiar to person is applicable to animals. Undoubtedly, certain legal restrictions are placed on human beings in their dealings with animals and these restrictions form the core of animal rights.” [See Page 3 of the Book]
It is submitted that this observation is correct. For example, such restrictions on human beings in favour of animals have long been recognized by the holy scriptures. Hence The Bible states in Exodus Chapter 22 verse 19 –
“Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.”
The Nigerian Criminal Code, recognizes this conduct as reprehensible but however, stipulates a lesser punishment by providing in its Section 214(2) as follows:
“Any person who has carnal knowledge of an animal is guilty of an offence and is liable to imprisonment for 14 years.” [Cap C.38 Laws of The Federation of Nigeria
In its wisdom, The United Nations General Assembly promulgated the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and this has formed the basis of the Fundamental Human Rights Provisions now to be found in all the Constitutions of the various countries of the world. For example, this is now Chapter IV of the Constitution of The Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999. Thirty years later and in a similar vein, the same United Nations promulgated the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights of 1978.
One cannot therefore resist the urge of asking the rhetorical question –
Why is the world body virtually giving parity of rights to human beings and animals?
The answer to this rhetorical question would appear to be found in the holy scriptures. In this connection, the Bible in Ecclesiastes Chapter 3 verses 18, 19 and 20 provides as follows:
“18. I said in my heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them and that they themselves are beasts.”
“19. For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.”
“20. All go to one place, all are of the dust, and all return to dust again.”
In the light of the foregoing, it is necessary to examine a few of the salient provisions of the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights discussed in great details in this very good Book.
Articles 2(b) provides:
“Man, like the animal species, cannot assume the
Right to exterminate other animals or to exploit
them thereby violating this right.”
It follows from this provision that endangered species should be specially protected.
Article 3(b) provides:
“If death of an animal is necessary, this should be
Sudden without fear or pain.”
This means that when it is necessary to kill an animal, it must be instantaneous, painless and cause no apprehension to the animal. In this connection, the author has specially noted at page 45 of the Book as follows:
“It is Allah’s commandment that in the course of killing animal for sacrifice during Idel-Kabir, a very sharp object must be used to cut the neck once so that the animal will not feel the pain. To use an object not capable of cutting the neck once is unacceptable worship to Allah.”
Articles 8(a) and (b) provide:
“Experiments on animals that cause physical and mental pain, are incompatible with animal rights even if it is for medical, scientific or any other kind of experiment.
(b) A substitute technique must be investigated and developed.”
In this connection, The Times of London Sunday July 29 2007 that scientists had created the world’s first schizophrenic mice in an attempt to gain a better understanding of mental illness. This was believed to be the first time an animal has been genetically engineered to have a mental illness. It is pertinent to observe that Animal Rights campaigners have vehemently condemned the research saying that it is morally repugnant to create an animal doomed to mental suffering. [See The Nation, Monday July 30 2007 at pages 1 and 2].
Articles 2(a) and 13(a) provide:
2(a) “Every animal has the right to be respected.”
13(a) “Dead animals must be treated with respect.”
These two articles have prompted the author at page 250 of this Book to comment on a recent incident that happened in Nigeria
“It is worthy of note to mention the emotional activities of the daughter of late Dr. Beko Ransome Kuti-Nike who was reported to have shunned food for days for the death of her dog; took her dead German shephered dog (Alsatian) carcass to the Lagos University Teaching Hospital Mortuary for two days and thereafter retrieved it
and gave it a befitting burial. Little did she know that she was complying with Articles 2(a) and 13(a) of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Animal Rights of 1978”. [See This Day, Thursday September 24 1998 ].
All things considered, this is a very good book. It is well researched and well written. In my considered view, it constitutes a curtain raiser in the field of Animal Rights under Nigerian Law. The writer therefore deserves commendation for this initiative of venturing into a legal study which is novel, difficult but very interesting and hopefully rewarding.
Finally, I commend this Book to the reading public especially the relevant Government functionaries at both National and State levels, researchers, religious organizations, Law Teachers, Law Students and members of the Bar and the Bench.
Professor D.A. Ijalaye, SAN, FNIALS, FNSIL,
Emeritus Professor of Law.
No comments:
Post a Comment