Tuesday, August 05, 2003
Re:Uniform Civil Code and Cow Protection Act

In my site on cow protection, there is a FAQ section, and a Legal sub-section in it. It essentially addresses the legal issues, and the replies given there are mine. One good way to go abt this "discussion" solo () would be to discuss what one could see as flaws in my own old explanations....

Here is the section....

Are not the rights of the slaughterer infringed by banning their profession?
This question is nothing new. The State of Louisiana tried to regulate the activities of butchers in 1869. They sued the state stating that their rights are being infringed upon and that under the amendments 13 and 14 to the Constitution of the United States' the state could not deprive them of the right to exercise their trade. The Supreme Court of The United States ruled in its December term of 1872 in the cases of The Butchers' Benevolent Association Of New Orleans V. The Crescent City Live-Stock Landing And Slaughter-House Company and Paul Esteben et al V. The State Of Louisiana. The majority holding was that the states have the proper police power to limit slaughterhouse operations for the health and safety of their residents.

That being the case, and given that the Indian Constitution is modelled on the constitutions of the democracies of the world including that of United States, and that precedents from such cases have been accepted by the Courts in India, it can be argued that a Ban on Slaughter can not be held as illegal or infringing on the Rights of the slaughterers. Definitely not, without being put to a constitutional test.

Can slaughtering be construed as a religious right?
No. In 1958, in the case of Mr H.M. Qureshi vs the State of Bihar, the Supreme Court had refused to accept the argument that the cow-killing was a religious right of a particular community.

Can ill treatment to animals be banned? Are there any precedents?
Yes. It can be banned and made an offence. In fact, even cruelty while killing is an offence by the English Statute. Adcock v Murrell is an instance of a conviction under the English statute in New Zealand for cruelly ill-treating a pig in attempting to slaughter it. The appellant had tried to kill one of his pigs, hacking at it with an axe, and inflicting four wounds on its head. He had sent for a butcher but was unable to find one for 2 days, during which time the pig was left to lie half-dead. It was held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.

Comments: Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger