Animal Rights

Displaying 191 - 200 of 253
Titlesort descending Summary
R. L. N. y otros s/ 239 resistencia o desobediencia a la autoridad
Rebuilding the Wall
Resolución 063/2018 - Comisión Derechos Humanos del Estado de Guerrero, Mexico Resolution 063/2018 by the Human Rights Commission of Guerrero, Mexico addresses concerns raised by members of the civil association "Responsible Citizen" and a professor and students from the Master's in Law program at the Autonomous University of Guerrero against the Director of Zoochilpan Zoo. The complaint alleged violations to the state animal protection statute, the Rights of Nature (Recognized in the constitution since 2014), and the right to a healthy environment due to inadequate conditions for the animals. After an inspection, the commission noted various issues such as animals of diverse species living together, dirty water in a pond, and animals in small enclosures. The zoo also failed to meet the standards of the Association of zoos, breeders, and aquariums "AZCARM," leading to recommendations for improvement. Resulting from these inspections, the commission found that the animals were housed inadequately, violating the state anti-cruelty law. They also highlighted potential impacts on the human right to a healthy environment for visitors and zoo staff. The Commission's recommendations include advising the Secretary of the Environment to implement recommendations for the welfare of exhibited animals, suggesting ongoing training for zoo staff to ensure dignified treatment, and advising the Zoo Director to implement legal and administrative measures for the animals' well-being, including budget allocation for necessary infrastructure and optimal conditions.
Revista Brasileira de Direito Animal Volume 17
RIGHTS OF SLAVES AND OTHER OWNED-ANIMALS
Roots of Human Resistance to Animal Rights: Psychological and Conceptual Blocks
Sacrificing the Sacrifice of Animals: Legal Personhood for Animals, The Status of Animals as Property, and the Presumed Primacy of Humans


Part I of this article begins with consideration of two different definitions of legal personhood. In Part II, the author makes use of philosopher Jacques Derrida's suggestion that humans maintain their hegemony and conceptual separation from animals by failing to include animals in the proscription “Thou shalt not kill.” Ultimately, the author concludes that these two examples indicate that pursuit of direct legal standing for animals themselves is not always necessary to secure positive substantive changes in the law.
SAVING APES WITH THE LAWS OF MEN: GREAT APE PROTECTION IN A PROPERTY-BASED ANIMAL LAW SYSTEM
Schindler v. Mejias


This appeal is an appeal of the denial of defendant's motion for summary judgment in a defamation action. Plaintiff, an attorney, brought an action against Hector L. Mejias Jr., an employee of defendant Ulster County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, claiming that Mejias falsely accused him of misrepresenting himself as the Ulster County District Attorney during a sworn deposition. The statement occurred during an incident at the SPCA where Plaintiff-Schindler was trying to pick up a dog owned by his client. The particular issue on appeal is whether the supreme court erred in determining that Mejias's supporting deposition constitutes libel per se. The court found that the alleged act was sufficiently egregious because such a claim would suggest professional misconduct on an attorney's part and invites both disciplinary action and damage to an attorney's professional reputation. Further, defendants failed to meet their burden of showing an absence of malice. The order was affirmed.
Sentencia 00017-2010-PI/TC, 2011 - Peru El Colegio de Abogados de Lima Norte interpuso esta demanda contra el Congreso de la República de Perú en relación con varias leyes que promovían el desarrollo de espectáculos públicos no deportivos, como las corridas de toros y las peleas de gallos. El Colegio de Abogados alegó que la legislación era inconstitucional, ya que contradecía el derecho a la igualdad así como varios principios fiscales al gravar los espectáculos no deportivos pero no los deportivos. Además, alegó que, mediante estas prácticas, el Estado desatendía su deber de garantizar la participación en el patrimonio cultural nacional de Perú. El Congreso argumentó que la reclamación carecía de fundamento, ya que no se había discriminado a nadie por factores demográficos. El tribunal sostuvo que la reclamación era infundada, ya que, en última instancia, las corridas de toros son una manifestación cultural regulada y la Constitución peruana permite a los legisladores hacer uso de su discrecionalidad para imponer tributos.

Pages