Failure to shift animals from zoo irks IHC

IWMB officials, climate change minister told to file responses by July 11


Our Correspondent July 08, 2020

ISLAMABAD:

Over a month after issuing directives to shift the pachyderm Kaavan and other animals at the Islamabad (Marghzar) Zoo to a shelter, the high court on Tuesday expressed its displeasure over the non-implementation of its orders.

It also sought a reply from members of the local government, a wildlife board of the federal capital and the minister in charge of the federal climate change ministry.

This was directed in a three-page order issued by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Athar Minallah on Tuesday.

In the order, Minallah said that on May 21, the court had declared that Kaavan, the lone elephant at the zoo and all other animals had been confined at the Islamabad Zoo illegally and that the conditions of their incarceration amounted to “subjecting these living beings to unnecessary pain and suffering.”

Moreover, the chief justice said that the minister in charge of the Climate Change Ministry and members of the Islamabad Wildlife Board (IWMB) would be jointly and severally liable for the welfare and wellbeing of each animal at the zoo until their relocation to a sanctuary.

Why was Police Order 2002 never implemented, asks IHC

The order read that the representative of the IWMB “was not able to satisfy” the court why an extension should be granted in shifting the animals from the facility.

By subjecting “Kaavan” and all other animals confined at the zoo to continued unnecessary pain and suffering, “members of the Wildlife Board, which includes the minister in charge of the Climate Change [ministry], appear to have exposed themselves to criminal proceedings under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1890, besides initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003,” the order read.

It subsequently directed the chairman and each member of the wildlife board “to submit their respective affidavits explaining why they may not be proceeded against for delaying implementation of the judgment.”

Published in The Express Tribune, July 8th, 2020.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ