LAW LORDS RULE HUNTING BAN IS 'LAWFUL'

RSPCA

The House of Lords has today dismissed appeals by the Countryside Alliance and other hunting supporters who argued the hunting ban breaches Human Rights and European law.

The Hunting Act 2004 must “be taken to reflect the conscience of a majority of the nation,” said Lord Bingham, the senior Law Lord, in the leading opinion - after a unanimous ruling by the five Law Lords who heard the case last month.

He went on to say “The democratic process is liable to be subverted if, on a question of moral and political judgment, opponents of the Act achieve through the courts what they could not achieve in Parliament.”

This case provided a rare opportunity for animal welfare legislation to be considered by the highest court in the land. The RSPCA was granted permission to intervene in the proceedings and presented written submissions to the court.

John Rolls, RSPCA Director of Animal Welfare Promotion, said: “The ability to make animals suffer for sport is not a human right, and we are glad to see that the Law Lords have unanimously decided to dismiss these appeals. We see this as a total vindication of our long-held view that hunting with dogs is cruel and unacceptable in modern Britain”.

All five Law Lords Law Lords who heard the case (Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood) decided the appeals should be dismissed.

Lord Hope commented: “The history of legislation in the United Kingdom for the prevention of cruelty to animals leaves no room for doubt that in this country*the subject is deeply rooted in public policy. It has been for a long time regarded as one of the fundamental interests of society about which Parliament is expected, when the need arises, to legislate.”

Lord Bingham viewed the Hunting Act as a measure of social reform and that Parliament considered that the killing of foxes, deer, hares and mink “by way of recreation infringed a fundamental value expressed in numerous statutes and culminating in the 2004 (Hunting) Act”.

After the judgment, the RSPCA’s John Rolls said: “It is time for people who have spent millions of pounds challenging this law to accept it and move on. Cruelty-free hunting, which does not involve chasing a wild animal and where the pageantry, social recreation, jobs, horses and hounds can be retained, is the obvious way forward, and something the RSPCA has always suggested.”

The legal challenge brought by the Countryside Alliance and other hunting supporters had previously been dismissed by both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Ten of the country’s leading judges have now dismissed these pro-hunt claims since the Hunting Act became law in 2004.

The Law Lords also today unanimously dismissed a related case involving a challenge to the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002.

Lord Hope, giving the leading speech in that case, agreed “there was adequate factual information to entitle the Scottish Parliament to conclude that foxhunting inflicted pain on the fox and that there was an adequate and proper basis on which it could make the judgement that the infliction of such pain in such circumstances constituted cruelty”.

Read More Here