Louise van der Merwe is deeply honoured to have been awarded an Honorary Fellowship by the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics in recognition of her contribution to the cause of animal protection.
In announcing the award, Revd Professor Andrew Linzey said:
“This is the highest award that the Centre can bestow and is only given to individuals who have made an outstanding contribution to the Centre and/or the cause of animal protection. I am delighted to report that, after careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Selection Committee to invite you to become our thirteenth Honorary Fellow.”
For more information, visit the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics
Voices for Animals – A series of interviews with those who speak out loud and clear for all who are born nonhuman
David Bilchitz
is a Professor of Fundamental Rights and Constitutional Law at the University of Johannesburg (UJ) and University of Reading in the UK
He is also director of the South African Institute for Advanced Constitutional, Public, Human Rights and International Law (SAIFAC). He was the first full-time academic in over 20 years to be appointed as an acting justice on the Constitutional Court from February to May 2024.
Additionally, he is co-founder and director of Animal Law Reform South Africa, and has been involved in both academic contributions as well as practical efforts to advance the interests of animals in South Africa and globally.
Animal Voice asked Professor Bilchitz to comment on the United Nations’ inclusion of animal welfare in the Child Rights domain [GC26: 35].
Professor Bilchitz:
I think this is a very important development. Animals are very much affected negatively by all kinds of actions by humans but sadly, are often absent from international law frameworks. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child issues a ground-breaking General Comment (interpretation of the Convention on the Rights of Child) relating to children’s rights and the environment. As part of that General Comment, the Committee found that “children must be protected from all forms of physical and psychological violence and from exposure to violence, such as domestic violence or violence inflicted on animals.” (Para 35).
The committee here does a number of impor-tant things. It firstly recognises that animals can be subject to violence which can be inflicted on them. That recognition is important in conceptu-alising many forms of human behaviour against animals as ‘violence’. It is also important in that the word ‘violence’ implies that this behaviour is wrong in itself.
Secondly, the Committee recognises the interconnection between humans and animals: the exposure of children to violence against animals harms the children themselves and can cause trauma for their future development. Importantly, this recognises the similarities that exist between us as fellow creatures.
Lastly, the committee gives two examples: of domestic violence and violence on animals - they are not automatically the same, of course, and some violence against animals takes place outside the domestic environment.
However, it has been demonstrated, in empirical studies, that there is a vital link between abuse of animals and abuse of women and children in the home. For that reason, Dr Sheena Swemmer (whose PhD I supervised) has recommended including violence against animals in the home as a grounds for protection in the Domestic Violence Act. It seems to me that that proposal is consonant with the recognition by the Committee of the interconnection between forms of violence.
For all these reasons, the inclusion of the state-ment regarding animals is important but, in my view, only an initial step.
I hope that UN treaty bodies build on this recognition to go further in the inclusion of animals within international law frameworks and also recognise that their interests matter in their own right rather than simply because of the effect on humans.
...exposure of children to violence against animals harms the children themselves...
