Main Article Content
In 2016, the South African Constitutional Court recognised that the guaranteed human right to the environment, as contained in the Constitution, includes animal welfare. In its judgment, the court stated that the suffering of individual animals is correctly linked to conservation and that this “illustrates the extent to which showing respect and concern for individual animals reinforces broader environmental protections. Animal welfare and animal conservation together reflect two intertwined values”. Although the effect of the statement by the highest court in the land is yet to be fully realised, the court unambiguously demonstrated in its ruling the clear link between human rights and animal interests. These interests are not only to be interpreted in the broad sense relating to species-conservation, but rather the interests and welfare of individual animals.
Building on from this approach and the rationale provided by the court, this Paper looks to explore more broadly the interaction and linkages between human and animal rights and interests. More particularly, it attempts to illustrate how these concepts may reinforce and enrich one another and how this relationship may be better reflected in law and policy. It will argue that sophisticated democracies and movements require an integrational approach. By expanding the scope and interpretation of certain human rights to include animal interests; and through coordinated, targeted efforts – we ensure notion of justice is achieved, for all who require it.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Manuscript authors are responsible for obtaining copyright permissions for any copyrighted materials included within manuscripts. The authors must provide permission letters, when appropriate, to the Society Register Editors.
In addition, all published papers in Society Register are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Unported License.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern CC BY-NC 4.0 as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.
Animal Enterprise Terrorism (AETA). 2006. (Pub.L. 109–374; 18 U.S.C. § 43). (USA)
Animal Improvement Act, Act 62 of 1998 (South Africa).
Animal Legal Defense Fund. 2018. “2018-2020: Farmed Animals & the Law Student Chapters Program Guide.” ALDF Website. Retrieved September 8, 2019 (https://aldf.org/article/student-animal-legal-defense-fund-saldf-programguides/2018-2020-farmed-animals-the-law/).
Animal Protection Act, Act 71 of 1962 (South Africa).
Animal Protection Amendment Act. 2017. (South Africa).
Animal Welfare Act (Laboratory Animal Welfare Act).1966. (P.L. 89-544 §2132).
Baker, Aryn. 2019 “What South Africa Can Teach Us as Worldwide Inequality Grows.” Time. 2019. Retrieved September 10, 2019 (https://time.com/longform/south-africa-
Bilchitz, David. 2017. “Exploring the Relationship between the Environmental Right in the South African Constitution and Protection for the Interests of Animals.” South African Law Journal 134(4): 740-777. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2942112
Bilchitz, David. 2009. “Does Transformative Constitutionalism Require the Recognition of Animal Rights?” Southern African Public Law 25(2): 267-300. Retrieved September 10, 2019 (https://ssrn.com/abstract=1872936).
Bilchitz, David. 2010. “Does Transformative Constitutionalism Require the Recognition of Animal Rights?” Southern African Public Law 25(2): 267-300. Retrieved September 10, 2019 (https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC153243).
Department of Environmental Affairs. 2019. “Minister Mokonyane moves to address concerns on captive lion breeding and associated trade activities.” Retrieved 20 August 2019 (https://www.environment.gov.za/mediarelease/mokonyane_captivelion_nspca).
Cassuto, David N. and Cayleigh Eckhardt. 2016. “Don’t Be Cruel (Anymore): A Look at the Animal Cruelty Regimes of the United States and Brazil with a Call for a New Animal Welfare Agency.” Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 43(1): 1-43. Retrieved 20 August 2019 (http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/ealr/vol43/iss1/2).
Clark, Michael and David Tilman. 2017. “Comparative analysis of environmental impacts of agricultural production systems, agricultural input efficiency, and food choice.” Environmental Research Letters 12(6): 1-11. Retrieved July 20, 2019 (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6cd5/meta).
Colvin, Christine, Muruven, Dean, Lindley, David, Gordon, Helen and Schachtschneider, Klaudia. 2016. “Water: Facts and Futures, Rethinking South Africa’s Water Futures.” WWF. Retrieved September 9, 2019. (http://awsassets.wwf.org.za/downloads/wwf009_waterfactsandfutures_report_web__lowres_.pdf.).
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. 1996. Disney. 2019. The Lion King. 2019. (https://movies.disney.com/the-lion-king-2019).
The Economist. 2017. “South Africa has one of the world’s worst education systems.” Retrieved August 20, 2019 (https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2017/01/07/south-africa-has-one-of-the-worlds-worst-education-systems).
EMS Foundation. 2018. “Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports No 167─2018 No 167—2018 Fifth Session, Fifth Parliament of the Republic of South Africa Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports Tuesday, 13 November 2018.” Retrieved August 20, 2019 (https://emsfoundation.org.za/wp-content/uploads/Parliament-of-the-RSA-Announcements-Tablings-and-Committee-reports.pdf).
ESCR. 2019. “Introduction to Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.” Retrieved August 18, 2019 (https://www.escr-net.org/rights).
Gerbens-Leenes, P. Winnie and Mesfin M. Mekonnen and Arjen Y. Hoekstra. 2013. “The Water Footprint of Poultry, Pork and Beef: A Comparative Study in Different Countries and Production Systems.” Water Resources and Industry 1–2: 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wri.2013.03.001
Goldenberg, Suzanne. 2014. “Climate change: the poor will suffer most.” The Guardian, March 30, 2014. Retrieved July 20, 2019 (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/31/climate-change-poor-suffer-most-un-report).
Gorski Paul C. 2009. “Critical Ties: The Animal Rights Awakening of a Social Justice Educator.” Edchange Website. Retrieved August 21, 2019 (http://www.edchange.org/publications/animal-rights-social-justice.pdf).
Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Grootboom and Others (CCT11/00)  ZACC 19; 2001 (1) SA 46; 2000 (11) BCLR 1169 (4 October 2000).
Greenfield Project. 2019. Greenfield Website. Retrieved August 22, 2019 (https://www.thegreenfieldproject.org/).
Harvey, Ross. 2018. “The Economics of Captive Predator Breeding in South Africa.” SAIIA. Retrieved August 22, 2019 (https://saiia.org.za/research/picking-a-bonewith-captive-predator-breeding-in-south-africa/).
Hans, Bongani and Moolla, Yusuf. 2012. “Pet dogs not for blacks – Zuma.” IOL. Retrieved August 20, 2019 (https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/pet-dogs-not-forblacks-zuma-1445123).
Interim Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. Act No. 200 of 1993 (South Africa).
IWB. 2017. “International Wildlife Bond Letter to SA High Commissioner UK ‘Captive’ Bred Lions and the Tuberculosis (TB) Risk to Human Health.” Retrieved August, 23 2019 (https://iwbond.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/IWB_Letter-RSA-Embassy_14-August-2017.pdf).
Jones, R. C. 2015. “Animal rights is a social justice issue.” Contemporary Justice Review 18(4): 467-482. Retrieved August, 23 2019 (https://animalstudiesrepository.org/anirmov/9/).
Klein, Ezra 2019. “There’s no conflict between human and animal rights.” Vox, August 21, 2019. Retrieved August, 23 2019 (https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/8/21/20812623/animal-rights-suffering-singer-compassion).
Ko, Aph and Syl Ko. 2017. Aphro-Ism: Essays on Pop Culture, Feminism, and Black Veganism from Two Sisters. Brooklyn, NY: Lantern Books.
Kotzé, Louis J. 2014. “Human rights and the environment in the Anthropocene.” The Anthropocene Review 1(3): 252–275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019614547741
Malema, Julius. 2016. “Why do white people despise blacks?” Timeslive, January 10, 2016. Retrieved 22 August 2019. (https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/opinion-and-analysis/2016-01-10-why-do-white-people-despise-blacks/).
Marceau, Justin. 2014. “Ag Gag Past, Present, and Future.” Seattle University Law Review 38(4)” 1317-1344.
Mbeki, Thabo. 1996. “I am African.” SA People. Retrieved August 11, 2019 (https://www.sapeople.com/2016/05/25/i-am-an-african/).
Mureinik, Etienne. 1994. “A Bridge to Where? Introducing the Interim Bill of Rights.” South African Journal on Human Rights 10(1): 31-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.1994.11827527
National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Another. 2016. (CCT1/16)  ZACC 46; 2017 (1) SACR 284 (CC); 2017 (4) BCLR 517 (CC) (South Africa).
National Council of The Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Others (86515/2017)  ZAGPPHC 367;  4 All SA 193 (GP) (South Africa).
Open Secrets. 2019. Website. Retrieved August 23, 2019 (https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?Ind=A).
Poore, Joseph and Thomas Nemecek. 2018. “Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers” Science 360 (6392): 987-992. DOI: doi: 10.1126/science.aaq0216
R v Moato.1947. (1) SA 490 (South Africa).
S v Acheson.1991. (2) SA 805 (NM) (South Africa).
S v Mhlungu and Others (CCT25/94).1995. ZACC 4; 1995 (3) SA 867; 1995 (7) BCLR 793 (CC). (South Africa).
Shabalala and Others v Attorney-General of the Transvaal and Another. 1995. (CCT23/94)  ZACC 12; 1995 (12) BCLR 1593; 1996 (1) SA 725 (South Africa).
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 1948. UN General Assembly. Retrieved August 15, 2019 (https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/).
University of the Free State. Undated. Retrieved August 20, 2019 (http://learning.ufs.ac.za/ULL214_OFF/Resources/2.%20RESOURCES/2.%20Study%20material/2.%20%20English%20Guide/11.pdf).
Victor, Karen and Antoni Barnard. 2016. “Slaughtering for a living: A hermeneutic phenomenological perspective on the well-being of slaughterhouse employees.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being 11: 30266. DOI:10.3402/qhw.v11.30266
Wilson, Amy P. 2019. “Animal Law in South Africa: Until the lions have their own lawyers, the law will continue to protect the hunter.” dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 10(1): 35-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.399
Wilson, Amy P. 2019. “South Africa’s Fallen Pride: How Law and Government Fail to Protect Lions.” The Revelator. Retrieved August 22, 2019 (https://therevelator.org/lion-hunting-south-africa/).
Young, Katharine G. 2017. “Proportionality, Reasonableness, and Economic and Social Rights.” Proportionality: New Frontiers, New Challenges, forthcoming (2017).