Biodiversity Legislation and Environmental Protection: Department presentation
Constitutional Review Committee
09 June 2006
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
JOINT
CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
9 June 2006
BIODIVERSITY LEGISLATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: DEPARTMENT PRESENTATION
Chairperson: Dr E
Schoeman (ANC)
Documents handed out:
Biodiversity
legislation and environmental protection: Department presentation
The Humane
Education Trust
SUMMARY
The Committee was briefed by the Department of Environmental Affairs and
Tourism on environmental protection. The presentation specifically looked at
the Constitution and whether the existing provisions for environmental
protection were adequate. The Department felt that the Constitution adequately
covered the problems of pollution, hunting and animal cruelty.
Members noted that cultural and traditional sacrifices of animals were not
adequately addressed in the Constitution. Members questioned the legal background
to animal cruelty and sacrifice in relation to the Constitution. Both the
Department and Members concurred that the matter was extremely complex and the
Department stated that it would provide a follow-up presentation.
MINUTES
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) briefing
DEAT, Chief Director: Biodiversity and Heritage, Ms Leseho Sello, and the
Assistant-Director, Ms Sonja Meintjies, briefed the Committee on legislation
regarding environmental protection. The purpose of the briefing was to
highlight the existing legislation dealing with animal cruelty.
The areas of discussion included the Constitution, the National Environmental
Management Act (No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), the National Environmental Management
Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004) (NEMBA) and Provincial Legislation.
Members were informed that all South African citizens had the right to have the
environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations. The
purpose of NEMA was to make provisions for cooperative environmental governance
by establishing principles for decision making on matters affecting the
environment. The principles took social, economic and environmental aspects
into consideration before activities were carried out. The Department did the
administration of NEMA and implementation occurred at provincial level.
The purpose of NEMBA was to make provisions for the management of conservation
of biodiversity within the framework of NEMA. The Draft Legislation on
threatened or protected species established a permit system, the prohibiting of
permits for ‘canned’ hunting and permit applications regarding captive breeding
facilities. The use of poison, snares, traps, dogs, spears and artificial
luring agents were strictly prohibited.
The draft norms and standards relating to the hunting industry in South Africa
contained national guidelines for hunting permit applications, the prohibition
of hunting in protected areas and damage causing animals and provisions for the
accreditation of hunting organisations. The administration of NEMBA was done by
the Department and its implementation by provincial authorities.
Provincial Legislation was discussed with regard to the Mpumalanga Nature
Conservation Act (No. 10 of 1998). The Act had
established regulations regarding the hunting of game and prescribed the
conditions for the keeping of wild animals. In conclusion, the Department noted
that the environment was protected in terms of the Constitution; animal welfare
was regulated in terms of the Animals Protection Act (No.
84 of 1985) and animal welfare issues were addressed in terms of
biodiversity conservation at national and provincial level.
Discussion
Adv T Masutha (ANC) asked whether the Department was narrowing the scope of the
debate on animal cruelty. An area of inquiry that had been omitted in the
presentation had been the Common Law and it focussed on domesticated animals.
He advised the Department to assess the need to provide specific rights for
animal protection. He questioned whether the rights should be put in the Bill
of Human Rights and whether animals should be the bearer of rights. He noted
that a number of conceptual issues had not been dealt with in the presentation.
Ms Sello responded that the Department could not make provisions for changes to
the Constitution. The Department felt that the provisions for animal welfare
were adequate and that they complemented the provincial legislation. The same
provisions applied to wild animals.
Ms Sello noted that the point of departure for the presentation had been from
the environmental perspective. She noted that the Department could only make
recommendations within its jurisdiction. She commented that Common Law referred
to the responsibility of the person that held the animal. The inclusion of
these issues in the Constitution was debatable. The hunting industry could not
be neglected because it was an important industry in South Africa. There was a
need for better control over “human-animal” cases.
Ms M Njobe (ANC) commented that South Africa was culturally diverse and
sometimes animals were involved in certain cultural practices. She asked
whether the activities needed control. She queried the process for the
extermination of pests and rodents that were ruining crops and other animals
that were causing damage.
Ms R Ndzanga (ANC) asked whether the protesters against animal cruelty objected
to traditional slaughtering. She noted that if it were the case, then the
Constitution could not be amended.
Ms Sello responded that NEMA included cultural practices that fell under
broader activities that impacted on the environment. Unethical hunting had
impacted on tourism. Hunting methods must avoid animal suffering. She noted
that the presenters were not qualified to discuss cultural matters. It would be
linked to the mandate of the Minister.
The Chairperson noted that the matter was extremely complex. He asked whether
Section 24 in the Constitution provided the framework for the legislation and
whether it was adequate.
Ms S Camerer (DA) stated that the Committee should consider whether the
legislation should be the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture.
Ms Meintjies added that hunting with dogs was regulated under provincial
legislation. A permit was required for traditional activities. She noted that
only Government could authorise the killing of damage-causing animals. Humans
were allowed to kill animals in self-defence. Protected areas fell under the
game park authority but certain issues were still under discussion.
Adv Masutha (ANC) commented that the Department was not addressing the
constitutional issue.
The Chairperson asked whether the Constitution was adequate or whether it
needed strengthening. He noted that traditional rights often superseded some
practices and this had frustrated animal protection authorities. The Department
of Agriculture must be contacted to take the matter further.
Mr A Watson (DA) proposed that the Department’s researchers address the issues
discussed and provide feedback about the laws surrounding ritual killing and
animal cruelty.
Ms Sello responded that the presentation was not directed toward addressing
constitution issues. She noted that future engagements with the Committee would
be arranged. She believed that the Constitution was not inadequate and that
future presentations would be made with the assistance and inclusion of legal
advice.
The meeting was adjourned.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents
Present
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.