2024-04-26 11:51:07
by Silvia Morosi
The Court of Cassation acquitted the owner of the animal lost in Puglia and found in Calabria, who had not reported its disappearance. Once found, the owner declared that he could no longer take care of the dog, entrusting it to a private facility, without incurring crimes of mistreatment. The opinion of Enpa and Lav
In 2020, during the Covid emergency, he lost his dog, but did not immediately report the disappearance, as required by law. And, once found, he made no effort to go and get it back, making use, for example, of the “relays” put in place by numerous animal rights associations. Explaining – as reported by Il Messaggero – that he is unable, not only due to the limits imposed on travel from one region to another by the pandemic, but also by the serious economic conditions that have arisen. The Castrovillari court had initially sentenced the man on 24 May 2023, since the dog, a mixed breed with a microchip, was registered at the Canine Registry of the ASL of Bari (from 1 January 2005 the obligation came into force in Italy of microchips for dogs). Now a ruling from the Supreme Court (n. 16168/2, published last April 18) has established that he can only be subject to administrative sanctions, but will never be accused of mistreatment or abandonment of animals pursuant to article 727 of the Penal Code.
Ricci (Enpa): «It was a mistake not to report the disappearance, but it does not constitute the crime of abandonment»
Why? And what does the law provide? The specific case concerns a dog in Puglia, “used to leaving the house for several days” – one of the reasons given by the owner for the failure to report – and later found about 200 kilometers away, in Calabria. Article 727 of the Penal Code punishes «the crime of abandonment of animals, a notion which includes any conduct of willful intent not to keep the animal with oneself or the implementation of behaviors of inertia and violation of the duties of care and custody of one’s animal, but which does not include any criminally sanctioned obligation to report the loss of the animal”, recalls Claudia Ricci, lawyer from the Enpa legal office. And she clarifies: «In this specific case, we can say that the mistake was not reporting the loss of the animal», within three days, as required by law. Article 30, paragraph 1, letter. b), ln 7/2020 of the Puglia Region (“Regulations on the control of stray dogs, canine registry and protection of pet animals”) punishes, with an administrative fine from 150 euros to 450 euros, the conduct of the dog keeper who does not report the change of residence, the transfer, loss, death of the animal. “Many don’t know – she adds – that in addition to the obligation to report there is also the obligation to find”.
Once found, «the man then declared that he could no longer bear the costs of maintaining the dog and did not make any effort to go and get it back. But, in this case, there is no abandonment or mistreatment”, clarifies Ricci. The crime «would have occurred, in the case in question, if the owner knew that the facility in which the dog was hospitalized lacked the requirements and aptitudes intended for its well-being. In essence – he concludes – only if I know that the animal that I have entrusted in this case to a municipal or private kennel is going to be in unsuitable conditions, to simplify things as much as possible, am I abandoning it to its suffering”.
Ferrari (Lav): «A sentence that removes the owners’ responsibility»
This sentence “sends a very dangerous message that takes away the responsibility of dog owners and could also lead those going through a period of economic difficulty to abandon them”, specifies Alessandra Ferrari, head of the family animals area of Lav. In fact, «the reporting of loss must not be carried out only to avoid incurring an administrative offence, but also because it is a fundamental action foreseen in the responsibilities of those who keep a dog and must consequently answer for everything that happens to it or that animal can cause while wandering in the area, such as road accidents. The failure to report but combined with the refusal to reunite with the found animal, denotes a clear desire to get rid of the animal.” Conduct of this type, disinterest and not taking care of one’s lost dog, «also has the consequence that the animal, once found, will also aggravate the already difficult situation of many kennels which find themselves in overcrowded conditions, as well as representing a cost for the community because the maintenance cost is borne by the Municipality in which the structure is located”, Ferrari strongly highlights. In short, this sentence «removes all responsibility from the owner and keeper of a dog, which is what the law wants to do and what is correct to do. The focus must not be on the dog as a problem, but on the human responsibility of keeping an animal.”
April 26, 2024 (modified April 26, 2024 | 5:16 pm)
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
#lost #dog #Covid #report #fact #Court #Cassation #administrative #sanction