Am Montag, 9.Juli 2001, war eine Delegation des Tierschutzvereins CANIS, des Internationalen Bund der Tierversuchsgegner (IBT) sowie des "Arbeitskreises Juristen für Tierrechte" in Brüssel, um ein Gespräch mit Michael Scannell, Referent für Landwirtschaft im Kabinet des EU-Konsumentenschutzkommissars David Byrne, zu führen. CANIS trug dabei das Problem des Verbotes bestimmter Hunderassen in der BRD vor, welches gemäß Art. 28-30 des EG Vertrages einer wissenschaftlichen Begründung bedarf, um nicht handelsverzerrend zu wirken. Anbei der offizielle Brief an Kommissar Byrne.

Dear Commissioner Byrne!

On June 26th, 2000 a six year old boy was killed by two Pitbull type dogs of a criminal owner in Hamburg. This tragedy caused the German politicians to draw up regulations in order to prevent the public from lethal incidents of this kind in the future. Consequently, the federal government as well as nearly all German states introduced bans on certain breeds.

In our opinion - and in the one of ten thousands fellow Europeans -   this was absolutely the worst thing to do, since the then introduced regulations have not been appropriate at all. On the contrary, the problem has even increased, as many innocent dogs and their keepers are being discriminated. Instigated by the boulevard media, a polarisation has made its appearance among the citizens. Speaking in rough outlines, on the one hand there are dog lovers, on the other hand there are dog haters. This polarisation mainly is rooted in the extremely simplified and often disgusting coverage of tabloid media, which also coined the biased term “fighting dog breeds”. Only bad news is good news!

Not long after the German bans the hysteria on the so-called “fighting dogs” swept over to neighbouring Austria as well as to other countries, even overseas (Canada). Fortunately, the Austrian legislation has not followed the German example, yet.

Dear Mr. Byrne, when you wrote your letter to the German government we were very relieved, as we hold Art. 28-30 EC Treaty as an important means to counteract breed specific legislation. Above all, we appreciated you stressing the need to “endeavour not to adopt measures that would exceed what is strictly necessary to cope with the actual threat caused by these dogs.”, which implies that any ban imposed must be based on “irrefutable evidence of a real rather than imagined threat to the German public.”

CANIS International and IBT would like to know how you will proceed on this matter.

As far as we know, Germany has not presented the asked for solid scientific evidence till now – and very likely will not be able to do so in the future.

What measures will the European Commission take then?
Will the case be taken to the European court?
What if France or other nations follow the German model?
What if the principle of proportionality is further on neglected by Germany?

Our organisations have fought at the national as well as the international level against breed specific legislation and will continue doing so.

Enclosed you can find:

A scientific study by Dr. Irene Stur from the Veterinary University of Vienna, which proves that the problem of dangerous dogs does not depend on the breed but on the individual. Please, feel free to use this study.

The verdict of the International Court for Animal Rights in Geneva, Switzerland, from May 7th, 2001, by which 42 leading German politicians were found guilty of deliberately discriminating and/or killing dogs of certain breeds. Though, this court is just a private institution without any binding legal authority, the verdict is a moral victory. Besides, a great deal of public awareness has been raised.

On behalf of animals which cannot speak for themselves, our organisations kindly ask you to support our cause. Please, further pursue the matter on Art. 28-30 EC Treaty.

PUNISH THE DEED, NOT THE BREED!

We are looking forward to hearing from you

Sincerely,

Mag. Alexander Willer,

President CANIS International,

delegate on behalf of IBT

 

Home

 Zurück