Human Protection of Animal Rights and Intelligence

The truth of adage that a being merits moral consideration is to mention that there exists an ethical declare which can be exercised upon, who can recognize such claims. A morally considerable being may be wronged. It is one of the maximum conventional views that only human beings are taken into consideration to be morally substantial because they could apprehend ethical claims. Whilst we contemplate upon it, we discover cluster of being who understand ethical claims and cluster of being who are suffering ethical wrongs aren't co-considerable. This serves as a pedestal for advocating animal rights not only human, animal too suffer moral wrong. “A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast but the tender mercies of wicked are cruel”. Jeremy Benthem in his book “Principles of moral legislation” claims that every living organism on this planet is governed by two sovereign masters ‘Pain’ and ‘Pleasure’. Everyone enjoys pleasure and wants to diminish pain. We all are bundle of nerves. There no difference between human and animals both of them avoids pain and wants to experience pleasure. “The question is not ‘Can they reason?’ nor ‘Can they talk?’ but ‘Can they suffer?’” In that passage, Bentham points to the capacity for suffering as the vital characteristic that gives a being the right to equal consideration. The capacity for suffering is not just another characteristic like the capacity for language or higher mathematics. All animals have the ability to suffer in the same way and to the same degree that humans do. They feel pain, pleasure, fear, frustration, loneliness, and motherly love. If we can’t understand their language that doesn’t mean we can control their lives as we want to. We have to give them. What is due to them as said by Aristotle regarding justice.

Human Centred Prejudice

The class of human being has a ubiquitous demeanour of prejudice where it favour its own class of species while harms, exploit the foreign species. Humans have a dominating nature they try to override their own interests above others. As a morally irrelevant characteristic it cannot serve as the basis for a view that holds that our species deserves moral consideration that is not owed to members of other species. Dworkins analysis of Rights The core concept of his theory is “equal treatment” and “Treatment as equal”. Sometimes when we enact legislation for equal treatment still inequality persists to exist. The reason behind its existence is of “Double Counting”. He referred it as corruption. There are basically two preferences external and internal preferences. When we ask should humans be allowed to exploit animals? People voting in affirmative shows external preferences which means that they are not only governing their own life but too governing animal life. On the other hand if we frame it like this. Should every living organism have their right to live life? Here people in affirmative governs their own sole interests and not govern others way of life. Thus this element of “double counting” has to be eliminated while enacting any legislation. Animal right in the current legal scenario is being compromised upon this corrupting element of double counting.

Life is given to us by god. We all are guardian to it. Nobody can take it neither we have authority to give permission to take it. God is the creator. Life liberty and pursuit of happiness is inalienable right. From life emerges liberty. It is God who gave each individual liberty, and thus, it is God who owns each person’s liberty. Similarly, the individual is merely the custodian of the liberty he enjoys. The community does not own the individual’s liberty. Since the individual and the community do not own life or liberty, they cannot interfere with life or liberty. The community cannot use the individual for the collective happiness.

An animal’s ethical declare is equivalent to an ethical proper, any movement that fails to deal with the animal as a being with inherent well worth would violate that animal’s right and is as a consequence morally objectionable. In line with the animal rights position, to deal with an animal as a means to a few human end, as many people do once they devour animals or test on them, is to violate that animal’s right. As Tom Regan has written, animals are handled mechanically, systematically as though their cost were reducible to their usefulness to others, they're robotically, systematically dealt with a lack of respect, and accordingly are their rights mechanically, systematically violated.

The animal rights role is an absolutist function. Any being that could be a subject of a life has inherent well worth and the rights that defend such well worth and all subjects of an existence have these rights similarly. For this reason any practice that fails to respect the rights of these animals who have them, e.g., ingesting animals, hunting animals, experimenting on animals, and the use of animals for leisure, is inaccurate, no matter human need, context, or lifestyle animal right should not be override or compromised on any aspect.

Increasing atrocity day by day is a proven fact of lackadaisical comportment of government towards protection and welfare of animal. Every living organism in this society has consented and surrendered their right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. In order to be better off and not worsen off. Nobody was willing to live in the state of nature where there was always threat to life limb and property. Animal too form a part of this society whose rights should be given equal importance and equal weightage as a human right. Animal right should be given preferential treatment of “Treatment as equal” and not “Equal treatment” whose application is not free from inequality as discussed earlier.

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act” was passed by our parliament in 1960. This was to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain and suffering on animals. “Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, himself a great animal lover, played a major role in this legislation. In their wisdom and foresight, the original framers of the Act of 1960 clearly mentioned that “nothing contained in this Act shall render unlawful the performance of experiments on animals for the purpose of advancement by new discovery of physiological knowledge or of knowledge which will be useful for saving or for prolonging life or alleviating suffering or for combating any disease, whether of human beings, animals or plants”[1].

“It is suggested that a self-regulatory restraint on needless animal experimentations is required. Education and training the animal housekeepers and scientists and medical teachers will go a long way in achieving this goal. Modernizations of animal facilities are necessary to get the quality work obtained from a “good quality experimental animal”. Refinement in animal experimentations and replacement by other non-animate models (limited scope) will lead to few animals being used and this will automatically reduce the pain and suffering inflicted on the animals”[2].

One-third of Americans believe that animals should have the same rights as people. The legal rights animals possess centre around protection from physical harm and mistreatment[3]. The Animal Welfare Act, for example, provides no protection for farm animals, birds, rats, and mice[4]. Animal rights theorists suggest that some animals possess sufficiently human-like characteristics and that it is immoral to kill them for use as food or fur, or keep them in captivity.

Peter Singer argued that all beings capable of suffering should be considered equally for humane treatment. Tom Regan suggests that mammals possess consciousness and thus have an identity that vests them with inherent value. Rachel Nussbaum Wichert and Martha Nussbaum have argued for applying the capabilities approach to animals, suggesting that they have an inherent right to ten vital characteristics of a well-lived life [5].

A Nagarajan v/s Union of India, the Honourable Supreme Court of India directed the government to amend the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960. The Supreme Court stated “….Parliament, it is expected, would elevate rights of animals to that of constitutional rights, as done by many of the countries in the world, so as to protect their dignity and honour”. Despite this directive by the apex court, the law still remains in its original form. State of U.P Vs. Mustakeem and Ors, Custody of animals, in cases of cruelty, shall not be given to the accused but to the nearest gaushala or pinjrapole, until the conclusion of the trial: Supreme Court. Gauri Maulekhi Vs. Union of India and Ors, strict implementation of prohibition of cattle smuggling across the border for Gadhimai animal sacrifice in Nepal. Additionally, several welfare recommendations shall be adopted: Supreme Court.

The rules under the PCA Act 1960, largely suffers from weak penal provisions. While the penal provisions pertaining to fine in the Act may have been a sufficient deterrent in 1960, those provisions have lost their significance due to inflation. As monetary penalties under legislations of various jurisdictions change regularly, it is averred that the penal provisions in the said Act are required to be revised suitably. While keeping in view both the health and welfare of the people and the avoidance of pain and suffering of animals, punishment for all offences under the Act need to be appropriately revised.

One of most well suited quote on endangered species is “Prevention is always better than cure”, howsoever because of extenuating circumstances we always end up in the eleventh hour. The current situation of our endangered species is alike. In order to cure something we need to know its root cause so that we are not faced with the same problem again. Various causes behind the endangered species are as follows:

• Habitat Loss - Our mother “Earth” undergoes a continuous process of change which also serves as a threat to the species itself. Metamorphosis which takes place through nature is however sustainable to these species but when there is human intervention in these processes it becomes fatal for the species to incorporate the brisk unfavourable condition which finally push them to the list of endangered species. Ex- Industrilization, Deforestation etc.
• Exotic species - When there is introduction of exotic species which may be introduced through natural forces or human activities. It serves as a great threat to the existing species and ultimately leads to the verge of extinction.
• Overexploitation - Too much of cook spoils the broth suits very well with this cause. Overexploitation of anything leads to destruction and creates bad effect. Many wild animals are overexploited because of trade and for other reason. Legal bodies has been instituted at both the level state as well as central which solves the issue and tries to limit down the causes because of which species are becoming endangered. Law is considered to be supreme for anybody nobody is treated differently in the eyes of law, hence legal care in this aspect is done by a number of legal bodies.

Everyone can easily break a single stick however breaking a bunch of sticks is little difficult. Internationally constituted bodies and their framed laws serve as a “Bunch of Sticks” which works for the protection of animal rights. Animals have been always treated as a means to achieve some human needs and because of that their rights are violated tremendously. In order to overcast this problem there are certain laws made internationally which creates obligation to different countries.

Wildlife Conservation Society

Formed in the year 1895 and works globally. Today it works to conserve more than 2 million2 mile wildlife places around the world. The organization scours the world, helping a variety of wild species - gorillas, tigers and ocean giants included.

World Wildlife Fund

Mainly focuses on coexistence and conflict resolution of human and wildlife. Active participation in formation of policies and law. WWF grants special focus to particular species, including tigers, dolphins and elephants.

International Fund for Animal Welfare

Saving animals and habitats are key areas of focus. The organization provides hands-on assistance to animals and generates campaigns for the awareness of animals in danger of extinction.

World Society for Protection of Animals

Fundamental aspect of this organization is to ensure animals are treated with due respect, concern and love. It promotes the compassionate treatment of animals and good animal welfare.

People for the Ethical treatment of Animals

PETA its one of the largest animal rights organization renowned globally devoted entirely in the protection of animal rights. PETA is engaged with public education, research, legislation and animal rescue.

Animal Welfare Institute

Formed in the year 1961 key aspects are promoting animals’ prosperity and wellbeing. Tries to curb in entirety any detrimental activities of humans against animals. These internationally constituted bodies which gives priority to animal rights creates a worldwide obligation to follow its rules and regulation. Its high time to cater their vision and take it as an obligation to make a society which has an equal right to the animals.

It is no paradox to say that in our theoretical moods we are very close to our practical application, howsoever in reality it’s just the other way round. In theoretical application we are dealing with only pen and paper if compared to practical application we are dealing with the real world which is complex, self-centred, rough and deceptive. In the same manner animal rights in theory sounds good and effective which can be endeavoured but in reality it’s quite challenging. Implementation of any policy or law is not an easy job and when the same is connected with day to day life activities then it becomes really difficult to have a ubiquitous view.

• Homosapiens - We who advocate for animal rights we ourselves are the biggest obstacle to it. Our population is growing too fast and in order to serve it we displace disperse remove and replace animals from their habitat.
• Veganism - Its more than a diet it is a complete abstain from using any animal produced goods such as milk, curd, panner or meat not even medicines.
• Animal Experimentation - one of the most challenging issues faced by the governments while advocating for the animal rights is finding substitute of animal in experimental activity. All of our medicines are first of all tested on animal before injecting to human body. Since today animal rights are not given too much preference because of that we simply keep on doing experiment on animal for human benefits.
• Factories/Industries - Industrialization was boon to society. It makes a country developed and prosperous based upon animal rights violation. Factories such as Dairy and leather which wholly survives on animal wouldn’t be able to replace it with other substitute easily.
• Animals in Entertainment - different parts of the country still practise some ritual which involves animal use as well as sacrifice. Still in some remote areas ploughing is done with the help of animals. In urban areas animals are used for entertainment purposes like in circus or cock fighting pokers, horse racing etc Issues and challenges are never ending in the real world they keep on increasing day by day. The root of the problem for advocating animal rights is in our mind. We don’t find the act as ‘Murder’ when we eat animal meat, we don’t compare the act as slavery when we keep a pet with us, and we don’t compare the act as immoral when we try to limit their population by sterilization.

Today we all are in a hypothetical imperative where we make our decision on the basis of our inclination we are just slave in this sensible world. However in the categorical imperative where every person is a rational person with pure reason and intelligible enough not being govern by his/her inclination. In the latter world moral worth is given to the acts of a being. We humans are carrier of not only our body but also humanity. We must not forget to serve other living being with humane condition. A butcher in the first world may be good/bad however in the latter world he is legally liable.