Worldwide:
Two Major Animal Rights Initiatives Rejected In Switzerland
To print this article you only need to sign up or login on Mondaq.com
On February 13, the U.S. prepared for the 13th of February with millions of people.
Despite having seen the Super Bowl, Swiss voters rejected two of them
Important animal rights initiatives. As reported (HereHere) by SWI swissinfo.ch the
International unit of Swiss Broadcasting Corporation
The proposed measures included a ban at all levels of animal testing
A measure that would have made non-primate humans certain
Rights in the canton Basel-Stadt
Animal welfareThe testing ban
Would have banned experimentation on animals or humans.
Would have banned import of any newly developed products
These tests can be used. According to
Swiss Federal Statistical Office44% of the total population
Participated in the voting but only 20.9% cast their votes
In favor of the ban. Most likely, the ban was a result of a
Recognition that an unqualified ban for all animal testing would
These have had a negative influence on scientific and medical research. In
In addition, Switzerland has one the most restrictive (and
Protective laws) regarding the use of animals in research.
Chapter 2, Section 6, Article 17, of theSwiss Animal Welfare ActIt is possible to:
“Animal experiments that inflict suffering, pain, or harm on animals”
Animals are subject to anxiety and can be a significant hindrance to their well-being.
general well-being or who may disregard their dignity in anyway
Other ways must be limited to theindispensable
Minimum. ” [Emphasis added.]
Rights of non-human primatesThe
Basel-Stadt would have been a measureModifiedSection 11 of the canton’s constitution
constitution, entitled “guarantees fundamental
rights” to ensure “the right to non-human primates
Life and to your physical and mental health.” According to
AComment on this caseBy lawyers who advised the
Initiative was supported by the proponents
lawsuit in which Swiss Supreme Court finally ruled that
Because it was only applicable to the affected population, it could be put to popular vote
The governmental bodies of the canton are different from private.
citizens. Ironically, all primates found in Basel-Stadt have been held by
The measure is even more effective if it involves private parties than government agencies.
If passed, it would have been symbolic and had no effect. Even as
It was a symbolic gesture that voters rejected.
The Basel–Stadt non primate measure proponents have been compared
It was referred to as “the work of Nonhumans” in the litigation.
Rights Project (NhRP) has been filing habeas corpus petitions writs
” However, as we
Have
The Non-Human Rights Project, as reported, has been uniformly
It was unsuccessful in obtaining a writ for habeas from any U.S. court
NhRP has not attempted to provide corpus for an animal, but it is possible.
for elephants and chimpanzees. The Swiss Supreme is also available.
The Court’s decision didn’t make any new ground in the matter of
animal “personhood.” It simply recognized the point.
Did the U.S. habeas case) that granting animals rights,
Legislative or voter action should be used to accomplish the task.
Initiatives are better than a judicial order. This is because
As in the U.S., Switzerland has no natural rights for animals and can be euthanized.
Unless the legislature explicitly states so, you have no legal rights.
Disclaimer: This Alert has been
This information was prepared for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be used for any other purpose.
This is not intended to be construed as legal advice. For more
For more information, please visit the firm’s website
full disclaimer.
POPULAR ARTICLES ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD
