With more than 182 detailed prohibitions and sanctions, the draft Law for the Defense of Non-Human Animals has been described as “inapplicable” by its detractors, who consider that it exceeds what was proposed by the Constitutional Court and could even subordinate human rights to those of animals.
In the midst of this dispute, the National Assembly faces the arduous task of finding a balance between animal protection and the socioeconomic realities of the country.
This bill, currently analyzed by the Biodiversity Commission, aims to “guard, protect and regulate the rights of non-human animals as elements that are part of nature,” according to the Ombudsman’s Office, which presented the bill. in August 2022.
In an exclusive interview with Ecuadorenvivo.com, Rodrigo Gómez de la Torre, former president of the Chamber of Agriculture, highlighted the importance of analyzing both the bill and the ruling of the Constitutional Court, pointing out that these documents contain uncommon terms in Ecuador. .
He also raised concerns about the ideology behind the project, calling it extremely prohibitive and questioning its benefit to society at large. Furthermore, he expressed his disagreement with the idea of imposing a particular vision on the entire population, arguing that this does not represent the interests of the majority.
Regarding the implications of the bill: »There are 182 prohibitions and sanctions of all kinds, from serious to light and super serious. These measures will generate complications and additional costs for production, in accordance with international agreements, which could make products more expensive for consumers.
When referring to his career and current position, Gómez de la Torre emphasized that, from his perspective, the constitutional rights of animals cannot be equated with human rights, underlining the importance of discerning between both areas.
Appearances next June 19
The Biodiversity Commission has scheduled a series of appearances on June 19, where various sectors will have the opportunity to express their opinions and concerns. Montilla confirmed that the Ecuadorian Animal Welfare Association will be present and will continue to collaborate in the construction of comprehensive and fair legislation.
Héctor Montilla, president of the Ecuadorian Animal Welfare Association, pointed out that this measure seems extremist and could be aimed at discouraging the consumption of proteins of animal origin.
“Prohibiting the display of slaughtered or cooked animals makes no sense from an animal welfare point of view, since once the animal is dead, there is no aspect of animal welfare that is affected.”
Montilla also mentioned the active participation of the Ecuadorian Animal Welfare Association in the legislative process, providing technical, scientific and legal input to ensure that the law is balanced and effective.
“We hope for a law that respects the multidimensionality of animal welfare, including consumer animals that are essential for human nutrition,” he stated.
During the interview, Montilla criticized other proposals in the bill, such as the ban on the use of highly productive chicken lines, pointing out that such measures are not only unnecessary from an animal welfare point of view, but could also significantly increase the cost. of chicken meat, affecting Ecuadorian consumers.
Bill was presented by the Ombudsman’s Office
The bill that seeks to protect animal rights was presented in 2022 by the Ombudsman’s Office.
The draft was worked on in conjunction with animal rights organizations, including:
- Animal Protection Ecuador,
- Andean Condor Foundation Ecuador
- Diverse Dialogue
- National Animal Movement of Ecuador
- Ecuador Animal Rescue Foundation
- Ecuadorian Association of Zoos and Aquariums
- Victoria Animal
- Free
- Ecuadorian Coordinator of Organizations for the
Defense of Nature and the Environment - Sacha Project
- Collective in Defense of Pollinators, among others.
Case of the monkey Estrellita: When did it all start?
Constitutional lawyer Joffre Campaña offered a detailed explanation about the case of the little monkey called Estrellita and the subsequent legal events that have generated debate in Ecuador.
According to Campaña, the case began when a woman in Ambato, whose pet was the little monkey Estrellita, was surprised by a raid on her home, during which the authorities took Estrellita and transferred her to an animal care center. Unfortunately, the monkey died shortly after arriving at the center.
Faced with this situation, the woman decided to appeal to justice by presenting a habeas corpus to recover her beloved pet. However, the court rejected his request, arguing that habeas corpus did not apply to animals.
This case generated a debate about the application of habeas corpus to animals, attracting the attention of activists and organizations in several countries. According to Campaña, this led to the need for an Animal Protection Law in Ecuador.
The National Assembly was given a period of two years to approve this law, while the Ombudsman’s Office prepared a 70-page project that exceeded the regulations of the Constitutional Court in terms of animal protection. Proposed regulations included a ban on killing crabs by putting them in boiling water, as well as regulations for shrimp farms to prevent the suffering of larvae.
Campaign emphasized the importance of focusing on reducing the project and limiting it to what the Constitutional Court ruling determined. This involves eliminating approximately 80% of the project and leaving only a few articles to comply with the Court’s mandate. Although he recognized the need to discuss and debate the project, he warned that shelving it would be violating a court order.
In conclusion, Campaña urged a careful and focused discussion on the animal protection bill, highlighting that it is an issue of great importance and need for the country.
By: Ecuador Live