An ape, probably a chimpanzee, looks out from a cage at a sanctuary outside Madrid. (REUTERS/Susana Vera/FILE)
Spain to grant some human rights to apes
By Eoin O'Carroll | 06.27.08
Spain’s parliament approved a measure Wednesday to extend some human rights to gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, and orangutans, becoming the first country to explicitly acknowledge the legal rights of nonhumans.
The parliament’s environmental committee approved a resolution that commits the country to the Declaration on Great Apes, which states that nonhuman apes are entitled to the rights of life, liberty, and protection from torture.
The declaration, developed in 1993 by a group of primatologists, ethicists, and psychologists known as the Great Ape Project, demands “the extension of the community of equals to include all great apes.” According to the declaration, apes may not be killed except under “strictly defined circumstances,” such as self-defense. They may not be imprisoned without due legal process, and they may not be subjected to the “deliberate infliction of severe pain,” even if doing so is said to benefit others.
Reuters reports that the resolution is expected to become law, and will likely take effect within one year. The news agency spells out what this means for Spain’s population of nonhuman apes.
Keeping apes for circuses, television commercials or filming will also be forbidden and breaking the new laws will become an offence under Spain’s penal code.
Keeping an estimated 315 apes in Spanish zoos will not be illegal, but supporters of the bill say conditions will need to improve drastically in 70 percent of establishments to comply with the new law.
The Times of London notes that the resolution could be the beginning of a trend toward granting similar rights to other nonhuman animals:
Spain’s conservative Popular Party also complained that the resolution sought to give animals the same rights as humans – something that the Socialist Government denies. Some critics questioned why Spain should afford legal protection from death or torture to great apes but not bulls. But Mr Pozas said that the vote would set a precedent, establishing legal rights for animals that could be extended to other species. “We are seeking to break the species barrier – we are just the point of the spear,” he said.
Spain’s resolution is regarded as a landmark move against “speciesism,” or human exeptionalism, but other countries have taken steps in recent years toward recognizing nonhuman apes as moral persons who possess an inherent worth and dignity.
In 2002, Germany’s parliament voted to add the phrase “and animals” to a clause in the country’s constitution requiring the state to uphold the dignity of humans. In 1992, Switzerland passed an amendment to its constitution that recognized animals as “beings,” and not “things.”
Last year, the parliament of Spain’s Balearic Islands endorsed the Declaration on Great Apes.
<< Want to name a sea slug? A nonprofit might let you. | MainComments
2. Lin | 06.28.08
yes people torture apes and monkeys as well as almost every other animal. have you been living in a cave your whole life or are you just that naive?
4. James | 06.28.08
Chimps hunt monkeys and eat them raw. But that’s okay. Rights only apply to them from humans, not from them to humans or to other animals.
This is all about destroying human exceptionalism, not helping apes. Otherwise, the matter could be handled via normal animal welfare laws, not establishing “rights” for animals, NONE of which can even understand the concept. Make no mistake, this is about HUMAN ideologues pushing HUMAN agendas. The apes are merely the “beards.”
7. Jim | 06.29.08
Understanding the concept of rights is not a requirement for having them, nor is the ability to carry out responsibilities that go with them. The severely mentally handicapped can’t understand the concept of rights, and many with mental illness cannot keep responsibilities, yet both human groups are automatically granted full rights of humans.
11. double | 06.30.08
This is bull ****. Apes are not equal to humans. They don’t know how to follow rules or laws. Apes kill other Apes. Humans shouldn’t be put in jail for killing apes either. So apes can **** and **** in the streets, steal and destroy peoples property withouts any punishment. These apes didn’t ask for any rights. I heard they can do sigh language And those apes wasn’t like ahhhh
excuse me I’m tired of working at the circus can i have some right. I say wait till they ask and follow rules. Wait till they evolve.
12. Tom | 06.30.08
Apes are such a great species and their protection should be taken as a serious stewardship. I can’t imagine why anyone would want to harm an ape or any animal. I feel sorry for animals in zoos. But in California where I live a chimpanzee escaped his cage and ate the face and testicles off of his prior owner. As much as these animals are deserving our care, they are still animals and what makes them different is that they have no capacity to higher reason. Though animals can feel and experience things like joy and sadness, that does not make them human in character. They have no capacity to know God or worship, their conscience has no intrinsic value of conviction or understanding the difference between moral right and wrong. Animals can not live by commandments, “thou shalt not murder”. People that want human rights for animals are naturalists, rejecting that God created human beings in His image. They reject the possibility that Jesus Christ came to die on the cross for to sin of humanity. Somehow to a naturalists, making a monkey out of people makes them feel better about their ephemeral life as stemming from evolutionary pond scum that is headed to no eternal value. The thought of Jesus returning to earth one day to redeem all life is a joke. The Biblical idea of the wolf and the calf lying down together is hapless poetry to the mind that is unregenerated by spiritual rebirth in Christ and stuck in the dirt of physical reality. The child leading the lion by the mane in the Kingdom of God is a delusion to the worldly wise that can hope for nothing more than becoming worm meat in death. **** to these naturalists is simply a myth. Animals controlled by savage instincts are not subject to God’s wrath but humans beings, excusing their lusts and carnal passions as just another species of animal, rejecting God’s outstretched hand of hope for their eternal redemption, will perish in the fire that they deny exists. They make a monkey human and make God a liar. God will be their judge and their stupidity will be their shame.
Tom
13. Brian | 07.01.08
Imagine having to wait in the emergency room with your dying child in your arms while an ape is having his appendix taken out? And of course since the ape forgot his insurance card…your taxes will pick up the tab.
14. robert seaton | 07.01.08
It’s about time they got around to helping my ex-wife.
Now if they could only find a way to stop her from
flinging ****.!!!
15. barry | 07.01.08
It’s all about rights now-a-days.
The right to abortion killing, the right to die, to kill the sick and the elderly, the right to select your child’s sex, the right to use human embryo’s for research, now a government who ascribes rights to animals. What’s next?
16. Carl Saucier-Bouffard | 07.02.08
Spain’s parliament voted to “extend some human rights to gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, and orangutans”! It is the first – but hopefully not the last – parliament to do so.
As a North American, this news is especially though-provoking. Even Spain, the country of the cruel practice of bull-fighting, is surpassing North America in terms of animal rights. Not only that, they are doing way better than us in terms of animal welfare. In the preface of the book Outlawed in Europe – How America Is Falling Behind Europe in Farm Animal Welfare, Peter Singer (who is one of the founders of the Great Ape Project, which has led to the Spanish legal initiative) has summarized very well the current situation:
“Sometimes people in the English-speaking nations have looked down on some
other cultures, including those of the Mediterranean countries, for being
less concerned for animals than their own society. Now, for the United
States, Canada, and Australia, the opposite is the case. Even in Spain […]
it will be illegal to cruelly confine hens and pigs on factory farms in
ways that will continue to be standard in the United States, Canada and
Australia.”
(Singer, p.ii)
Let’s hope that this news will make our North American parliamentarians reconsider their positions…
Kind regards,
Carl Saucier-Bouffard
17. Eric | 07.07.08
Why are humans so dumb? (especially the comments in 4 and 11 - 15)
Where do you people come from?
Rights for animals are about protecting their interests and merely treating as equal those interests we have in common, such as the right not be killed simply because it benefits someone to do so, or to live free to make our own decisions for ourselves. This is only an extension of our widely-held belief that we should treat like cases alike. To not extend this to nonhuman animals simply because they aren’t human is illogical, inconsistent, and unjust.
Welfare laws will never give animals the freedom they deserve.
18. Josh | 07.07.08
I find it remarkable that the issue of awareness and responsibility would even be raised in this discussion. Human infants have neither an awareness of their rights nor the ability to act responsibly. So are we saying it’s okay to put them in zoos, subject them to painful experiments to benefit adults, or kill them for the lucrative baby body-parts trade? Most who deride the rights of apes would respond with an unequivocal “no.”
As Aldo Leopold writes in “The Land Ethic,” the extension of rights to non-humans “changes the role of **** sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow-members, and also respect for the community as such.”
And what’s so bad about that?
19. Isengrim | 07.08.08
Apes are our closest relatives, genetically. And, as has been pointed out, someone with, say, Down’s Syndrome can’t understand rights (and responsibilities) either. If someone thinks there’s a difference between a Down’s Syndrome sufferer and, say, a chimp, consider this …
A “normal” human has 46 chromosomes. A “normal” chimpanzee has 48 chromosomes. But a Down’s Syndrome sufferer has 47. To those who would deny a chimp their rights, do you think that “abnormal” humans with the “wrong” number of chromosomes should also be denied rights?
If corporations can be considered legal “persons”, and mentally incapable humans with an abnormal number of chromosomes can be legal “persons”, then certainly a chimp, bonobo, gorilla or orang-utan can be considered legal “persons” as well.
Of course, we’re only barely 100 years out of using less fortunate or mentally “unfit” humans for medical experiments. Most of gynecology was founded on experiments on poor or mentally enfeebled women (mostly of African origin). So I suppose there will be some resistance to the idea of excluding apes from useless AIDS experiments and the like. However, I personally don’t see the difference in locking up a “retard” in a medical lab and doing experiments on him or her, and locking up a chimp for the same reason.
Apes have been taught American Sign Language, the same language deaf humans use. And from what I’ve seen, they communicate much better than many mentally enfeebled humans can and do.
So those of you who object to the idea of finally recognizing the other apes as our evolutionary cousins should be consistent, and start defending the idea of putting those with Down’s Syndrome back in the cages with the chimps.
20. Dub | 07.10.08
Have we lost our minds. Chimpanzees are animals no matter how similar to humans they are. They’re animals, there shouldn’t even be a disscusion on this!
21. Eoin | 07.10.08
Reading these comments, I’m seeing the emergence of two distinct and fundamentally incommensurable worldviews.
For some, it comes down to assessing great apes’ mental faculties. If we find that these faculties are similar to those of humans, the argument goes, then we can assume that great apes have a subjective experience that is similar to our own, and that these animals therefore deserve some of the legal protections that humans enjoy.
The other worldview isn’t really an argument at all, but rather an assertion of a quasi-religious sensibility that places all existing things into a hierarchy, an immutable chain of being in which everything has its place, with humans ‘above’ animals.
I think the reason that proponents of this second worldview react with anger and derision to this story is that their worldview is no longer taken for granted. These days, we live in a big world filled with people from all different backgrounds, and if you want to persuade others to come around to your view you have to put forth premises that are universally accepted and use reasoning that is universally regarded as sound.
Tom #12, whose comment appeals to revealed religion, can’t very well expect non-Christians to pay him any mind, any more than he would be willing to listen to a Buddhist put forth an animal-rights argument that appeals to reincarnation.
Those who aren’t even willing to explore the notion that humans may share a moral personhood with other animals tend to get testy. By entering the realm of reasoned argument, they would already be conceding the taken-for-granted-ness of their belief system. So instead, they assert, as Dub #20 does that “there shouldn’t even be a discussion on this!”
22. Dickbird | 07.14.08
Interesting, but will there be any attractive apes out there if all are given equal rights? What about the Miss Universe contest? Will they be able to participate? And what if they don’t win? Can we expect a lawsuit? This is dumb.
23. Sapien | 07.15.08
“Guns don’t kill people …apes with guns kill people”
Good. It’s not like we’d be missed.
29. Ozzy | 08.29.08
I’ve read a few of the points, couldn’t be bothered to read all, but here’s my two cents to this issue. Yes, humans are superior to animals and apes for many reasons (and when I say superior I mean they are capable of far more). Doesn’t recognising the natural rights of apes and animals not make us, the human, a far better, moral, understanding and ethical creature? I’ve read arguments on how God created us in his image, how Jesus died for us (supposedly) but in this case, God also created the animal kingdom, and this shouldn’t we have respect for God’s other creations too? I(’m not here to provide answers or point fingers, because that’s absurd. This is a complicated issue, however, complication doesn’t necessitate ignorance, aloofness and apathy. Torturing, harming, confining and abusing animals for the sake of pure human pleasure is inherently wrong, in my opinion. An animal doesn’t murder another, it acts according to it’s survival instincts. We, as humans however do, showing to an extent how we, as a race and species have gone beyond what we need and do what we desire. Respecting an animals’ natural place in this world is the most moral and natural thing we can do. An animal would not confine, torture, rape, abuse a human, but we will do it to them; What does this make us?
30. PETAherbivore | 11.18.08
Seriously, if everyone is as ignorant as the people who wrote comments
#’s 4, 6, 10-15, 20, Then we should remove THEIR rights.
Yes, people abuse ALL animals. No, they DONT deserve it.
Nobody deserves to be beaten, killed, or abused in ANY way shape or form.
And to give something as beautiful and significant as a comprehendable language to an animal is a HUGE milestone in the progress of human development and maturity. I don’t think people realize how monumental it is to have inter-species communication, and to say that these animals shouldn’t have their rights bcause they are JUST animals is an absurdly ignorant statement that really gives a bad representation of the many one-minded people.
31. Matt` | 01.08.09
#22, I doubt that many apes would understand the idea of a beauty contest or have any reason to want to participate… making them do so against their will would be the kind of animal abuse this is all trying to prevent.
But if there was an ape with the intelligence to understand what it is, and indicated that they wanted to take part, then… well, that would be an interesting day. Realistically though, a beauty contest is entirely geared towards human contestants, an ape wouldn’t stand much of a chance.
#20, I entirely agree with you that apes are animals, but I sense our opinions might diverge somewhat on the status of humans - in short, we’re animals too. To be more precise, we animals of the Phylum Chordata & Subphylum Vertebrata (things with a spine), Class Mammalia & Subclass Theria (mammals that give birth to live young, Order Primates, Superfamily Hominoidea (the apes), Family Hominidae (the great apes - humans, gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans), Subfamily Homininae (excludes orangutans) Tribe Hominini (excludes gorillas) Subtribe Hominina (excludes chimpanzees) Genus homo (only humans and early humans) Species H.Sapiens
So as you can see, we’re really very closely related taxonomically to the apes, and all that’s being done here is extending some rights and protections to our closest animal relatives. They aren’t making the great apes full equals of humans in society, so most of the more ridiculous things suggested are just that - ridiculous, but it will hopefully put an end to some of the cruel treatment of these intelligent animals.
32. tigerlvr14 | 04.07.09
Great Ape Project.. come on people, research it before you post.
1. The Right to Life
The lives of members of the community of equals are to be protected. Members of the community of equals may not be killed except in very strictly defined circumstances, for example, self-defense.
2. The Protection of Individual Liberty
Members of the community of equals are not to be arbitrarily deprived of their liberty; if they should be imprisoned without due legal process, they have the right to immediate release. The detention of those who havenot been convicted of any crime, or of those who are not criminally liable, should be allowed only where it can be shown to be for their own good, or necessary to protect the public from a member of the community who wouldclearly be a danger to others if at liberty. In such cases, members of the community of equals must have the right to appeal, either directly or, if they lack the relevant capacity, through an advocate, to a judicial tribunal.
3. The Prohibition of Torture
The deliberate infliction of severe pain on a member of the community of equals, either wantonly or for an alleged benefit to others, is regarded as torture, and is wrong.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Lavelle at iGreenify | 06.27.08
Faaaantastic! Gorilas libres!!!
Wait a second… With these rights, do they have responsibilities too? Or can they still chew fleas off one another, use the bathroom in the streets, and make whoopie on the park bench?
Maybe the precedent that is set is that Apes aren’t raised to be equal to us, but that we are lowered to be equal to them? So maybe soon we’ll be liberated as well?
If not, then are humans held to a higher standard of behavior than Apes? I wonder why that is… And why couldn’t the Apes liberate themselves if they are equal to us?
I dunno… maybe we should just leave things as they are and let ANIMAL rights activists protect them. Besides, does anybody really want to torture Apes and monkeys anyway?