JULY 14, 2008: "What’s Next in the Law? The Unalienable Rights of Chimps"
Spain’s parliament recently passed a resolution granting legal rights to apes.
...A nonbinding resolution in Spain, which the Parliament now has to flesh out with more specific laws, allows apes to be kept in zoos but not used in circuses or other kinds of performances. It calls for banning research that harms apes.
With the resolution, Spain becomes the world leader in protecting the rights of apes...
Perhaps "Matthew Hiasl Pan" should move to Spain. I bet Spain would grant Pan asylum.
_______________
Austria's Supreme Court refuses to recognize the humanity of Matthew Hiasl Pan.
That's a good thing because Pan is a chimp, literally.
VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- Austria's Supreme Court has dashed hopes by animal rights activists to have a chimpanzee declared a person, a statement suggested Tuesday.
The court recently rejected a petition to appoint a trustee for the chimp, named Matthew Hiasl Pan, the Vienna-based Association Against Animal Factories said, and subsequently vowed to contact the European Court of Human Rights over the matter.
The court's decision follows in the footsteps of a similar ruling last fall. In September, a provincial judge in the city of Wiener Neustadt dismissed the case, ruling the Association Against Animal Factories has no legal standing to argue on the chimp's behalf.
The legal back and forth began in February, when the animal shelter where Pan and another chimp, Rosi, have lived for 25 years filed for bankruptcy protection.
Activists want to ensure the apes don't wind up homeless. Both were captured as babies in Sierra Leone in 1982 and smuggled to Austria for use in pharmaceutical experiments. Customs officers intercepted the shipment and turned the chimps over to the shelter.
I'm all for protecting animals from abuse, but it's crazy for the Association Against Animal Factories to argue that Pan is a person.
Animals aren't people.
I wonder how many of these activists believe that a human fetus should not be granted personhood.
Why would the Association Against Animal Factories contact the European Court of Human Rights over the matter?
What about "human" don't they understand?
8 comments:
How do I contribute to Matthew and Rosi's funding?
Contact the Association Against Animal Factories.
Corporations aren't "human" either, but legally they have personhood in the United States.
Who is more deserving of protection?
I don't think you understand the "personhood" granted to corporations in legal matters.
It's not the same as granting a chimp the status of a human being.
I think anonymous understands perfectly -- the "personhood" granted to corporations (or ships) is exactly what they wanted for the chimp -- legal status on its own.
Sorry. It's different.
Mary,
I am very curious to hear how it is different. Personhood in a legal sense, as I understand it, means that whatver has said personhood is a legal entity, and therefore can do things such as recieve money... which is the issue here. A business can apply to become a person, and when this personhood is granted, it is called a corporation. It is not called a human. And the chimp in question wouldn't be called a human either if personhood was granted.
I think the argument that if personhood can be attributed to a non-alive entity, why not a chimp which can feel, use language, remember the past, hope for the future, and become homeless if personhood is not granted?
Again, what is the difference you are talking about?
A business can apply to become a person, and when this personhood is granted, it is called a corporation.
You're oversimplifying the matter. There are different types of corporations with different benefits and rights under the law.
Legal rights, in the case of corporations, don't necessarily reflect human rights as used in our everyday vernacular.
You speak of Matthew Hiasl Pan in human terms -- "a chimp which can feel, use language, remember the past, hope for the future."
That's different from the sort of personhood granted to corporations for tax purposes, liability matters, property ownership, etc.
Question: Why has the chimp formerly known as Hiasl been renamed Matthew and given the last name Pan?
What's the point of that?
The process of becoming a corporation usually doesn't involve such blatant efforts at personification.
There's the rub.
Post a Comment