Did you know that your version of Internet Explorer is out of date?
To get the best possible experience using our website we recommend downloading one of the browsers below.

Internet Explorer 10, Firefox, Chrome, or Safari.

In a landmark ruling, an orangutan named Sandra held in an Argentine zoo has been recognized as a "non-human" person with basic legal rights.In a landmark ruling, an orangutan named Sandra held in an Argentine zoo has been recognized as a "non-human" person with basic legal rights.

Orangutan Declared 'Non-Human Person' In Argentina

Like us on Facebook:
The current article you are reading does not reflect the views of the current editors and contributors of the new Ecorazzi

In a landmark ruling, an orangutan named Sandra held in an Argentine zoo has been recognized as a “non-human” person with basic legal rights.

Local media reported on Dec. 21 that a Buenos Aires judge ruled in favor of animal rights advocates who called for more freedom for the 29-year-old orangutan who was born in a German zoo before being transferred to the Buenos Aires zoo two decades ago.

The Association of Officials and Lawyers for Animal Rights (AFADA) filed a habeas corpus petition —  a legal means for addressing the unlawful detention of prisoners — on behalf of Sandra in November. The group argued that Sandra has sufficient cognitive abilities, and therefore should not be treated as an object.

The court agreed and ruled Sandra as a “non-human” person who deserved basic legal rights, including her freedom. The group now wants Sandra transferred to a sanctuary.

“This opens the way not only for other Great Apes, but also for other sentient beings which are unfairly and arbitrarily deprived of their liberty in zoos, circuses, water parks and scientific laboratories,” the daily La Nacion newspaper quoted AFADA lawyer Paul Buompadre as saying, according to the Huffington Post.

Unfortunately, Tommy the chimpanzee from New York state wasn’t so lucky earlier this month. Animal activists used the habeas corpus writ to argue for his right to freedom, but a five-member state judiciary panel tossed out the case, citing that a chimp could not be considered a “legal person” and thus could not receive his freedom.

The New York Times reports that Justice Karen K. Peters of the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court wrote that “apes’ lackadaisical approach to civic life meant they did not deserve many of the rights afforded [to] most people.”

Although chimps share nearly all of the same DNA as humans, the animals’ lack of responsibility causes them to be less than human in the eyes of the law, according to Justice Peters.

Hopefully, Sandra’s case will be the first step in acknowledging that these animals are more like family to us than not, and soon they will be able to live more freely alongside us.

Via The Huffington Post 

Photo: Shutterstock

Like us on Facebook:
0 Comments

Beyoncé and Jay-Z sell out veganism for ticket giveaway

Veganism deserves better than constantly being considered something to be bribed, dared or loosely entered into.

Month one of “the year of the vegan”

News outlets are abuzz with the promise of new vegan products, celebs, and services and how that is somehow a fresh affirmation that our world is one turn closer to being fully free from animal use.

What About: “No-Kill” Eggs?

The reason for these advancements is not a sense of justice – because that can only mean going vegan – but is primarily driven by economics.

Vegandale Brewery offers the ultimate vegan night out

This brewpub helps veganism shed its stay-home-and-eat-tofu stereotype.

Don’t blame vegans for the shame you feel about using animals

The shame Carly Lewis claims veganism casts over her is more likely the ghosts of moral uncertainty, spectres that are more likely fish than cows, wondering how morality can possibly be used as ammunition in favour of murder.