Animal Protection Law No. 5199 has been on the agenda to be amended for more than 10 years, and it was worked on together with non-governmental organizations by establishing the Animal Rights Research Commission of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey in 2019. However, the legislative proposal prepared by AKP and related with the amendment in Law No 5199 and Turkish Criminal Law was approved by the assembly in the middle of the night completely ignoring the commission report.

Despite all our objections as animal rights defenders, the amendments to the law entered into force after being published in the Official Gazette on 14 July. All animal rights advocates know that this law does not protect animals, but those who earn profits from animals.

So, what changes in terms of animal rights with the "LAW ON THE PROTECTION OF ANIMALS AND THE LAW ON AMENDMENT IN THE TURKISH CRIMINAL LAW"?

HAVE ANIMALS BEEN TAKEN OUT FROM THE STATUS OF PROPERTY?

The law contains many contradictions. With this law, it has been announced that animals will be accepted as "life, not property”. However, there is not a clear and straight statement in the law regarding the termination of the status of property issue.

WILL IT BE POSSIBLE TO BUY ANIMALS FROM THE PET SHOPS?

There has been a perception in society that the sale of animals in pet shops is prohibited. With the amendment made in the law, there is still no obstacle to the purchase and sale of animals as goods, and they are even encouraged. It is not forbidden to sell animals in pet shops, but only to have cats and dogs. Cats and dogs will be produced in breeding farms and sold through the catalog at pet stores (pet shops). People will be able to go to the pet shop and buy the animals whose photos are in the catalog and whose conditions are unknown, from the production places allowed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Animal breeding places are places where animals are forcibly mated and abused. A law protecting the rights of animals should not allow them to be produced and sold. Currently, we do not have the right to complain about pet shops that have cats and dogs; because it is stated in the law that this ban will be implemented one year after the law comes into force. Thus, we see that those who treat animals as goods are given time to sell their cats and dogs. Again, no justice for animals! There is a law, but since there is no implementing regulation, the old practices continue, nothing has actually changed. Considering that the implementing regulation will also be issued in accordance with the basic lines of the law, namely the exploitation of animals for the sake of human interest, it is clear that it will not be a fair practice for animals and will not protect animals.

WHAT KIND OF PENAL SANCTION WILL BE APPLIED TO THE PERPETRATOR OF VIOLENCE TO ANIMALS?

Previously, only an administrative fine was given to the person who inflicted violence on an animal under the Misdemeanor Law. For the crime of "damaging property" in Article 151 of the Turkish Penal Code, it was considered as if one had damaged one's belongings. With the amendment in the law, the good news was given that animal violence will be punished with a prison sentence. Although cruelty to animals, torture, and sexual assaults are included in the scope of the Turkish Penal Code, the perpetrator is not allowed to be imprisoned with the specified penalties. In other words, since prison sentences are generally determined from 6 months or 1 year to 3 or 4 years, the perpetrator will not be imprisoned as long as the penalty is given below the lower limit or 3 years. In the event that the prison sentence is postponed and the announcement of the verdict is held back, when the legal period expires and other conditions are met, the crime does not even commit to the person's criminal record. Generally, the penalties are given at the lower limit. There is a small chance that the perpetrator will be sentenced to imprisonment of up to 3 years (up to 3 months in jail) if the sentence is given at the upper limit with public pressure and the judge's discretion, in situations that cause a lot of outrage in the society. Therefore, filing a lawsuit, being a follower, requesting involvement in lawsuits are of great importance for precedent decisions for animals. It is clear that the penalties are not deterrent. If a prison sentence was to be imposed in the amendment of the law, it should not be allowed to postpone the sentence and convert it to a fine, and the lower limit should be determined as 3 years. We can say that the current arrangement consists of persuading the public and deluding them.

HAS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN “OWNED-NOT OWNED ANIMAL” DISAPPEARED?

As it has been said, the distinction between "owned and not-owned animals" has not been removed. A criminal complaint cannot be filed with the prosecutor's office against a person who commits violence to an animal living on the street - unless he is red-handed. First, a complaint can be made to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. If the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry deems it appropriate, it will be able to apply to the prosecutor's office to file a lawsuit. We know from the past years that even administrative fines were not collected and followed up against the perpetrators of violence to animals. With this law, it is a big lie to say that the distinction between "owned and not-owned animals" is abolished, since the right of the people and NGOs to complain is taken away. And yet, we know that most of the perpetrators who have been on trial and have never been on trial, will continue walking among us without going to jail. Again, NOTHING has changed!

WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE ANIMALS IDENTIFIED AS A "DANGEROUS RACE"?

If you live with a dog defined as a "dangerous breed", you must have the dog neutered within 6 months after the law comes into force, and apply to the Ministry of Agriculture with the sterilization certificate. People who meet these conditions will be able to feed these breeds and walk them with a muzzle. These dogs are not allowed to enter public places and playgrounds. This article, which seems to have reduced victimization, does not offer a permanent solution for animals; and discrimination and racism still continue. There is no regulation regarding the rehabilitation and nesting of breeds identified as dangerous in shelters. No dog is dangerous, it is human who breeds them, raises them as aggressors, and uses them as weapons. Efforts should be made urgently to provide a suitable home and a safe environment for dogs imprisoned in shelters who have not committed any crime.

WILL THE NUMBER OF PETS WILL BE INTERVENED?

Another issue is the restriction on the number of animals in the houses. In the past months, Özlem Zengin stated that "a maximum of 3 dogs will be kept in a house." Her words were met with a great reaction by animal lovers and animal rights defenders, and a step was taken back in this regard. In the amended law, it is stated that "precautions to prevent harm and discomfort to the environment caused by the adopted animals" will be determined by the implementing regulation, and this shows that the number of animals we open our homes to will be the next. While the rights of the animals who cannot live on the streets and the people who take care of them should be protected; we can see that instead the rights of people who are uncomfortable with the animals, who pump out enmity and complain about them are protected.

MUNICIPALITIES ARE STILL THE DEATH CAMPS!

The municipalities with the highest number of animal rights violations have not been included in the scope of penalty. However, additions were made to Law No. 5199 under the title of Municipalities' Responsibility. With these additional articles, metropolitan municipalities, provincial municipalities, metropolitan district municipalities with a population of more than 25 thousand, and other municipalities were obliged to establish animal shelters for the protection, care, and rehabilitation of homeless, weakened, or danger posing animals. Municipalities with a population of less than 25 thousand will collect animals and send them to the nursing homes of other municipalities. These transfers will pave the way for the animals to be displaced, lost, thrown into the forests, and confined to the concentration camps we call the death camps. We do not accept the normalization of these death camps and the isolation of animals living on the streets. For instance, the situation is not different in Fethiye Municipality Temporary Animal Nursing Home, where animals that are defined as "forbidden breeds" and that have been confiscated or abandoned by the Municipality are kept on concrete floors that are out of the sun. We know that tagged animals, whose vaccination and sterilization process have been completed, are kept in captivity in the shelter, they are not returned to the place where they were taken, and they are condemned to live in their own filth. Nursing homes should be opened in every district and cooperation with civil society should be established, the necessary budget should be allocated, and its control and follow-up should be carried out. Municipalities should immediately stop isolating animals in concentration camps and send them to death; act with the awareness that animals are neighborhood residents and aim to solve the problems they face on the streets.

Animal captivity houses have not been closed, they are not being closed either. Animal experiments and hunting have not been prohibited. Exploitation continues in every field. How long can the human species close their eyes, ears, and mouths while all these atrocities continue before our eyes and the screams of animals are getting louder every day? This law raises the bar to continue human cruelty to animals. We will see this more clearly with the implementation regulation. However, we can achieve legal gains in favor of animals as more people oppose the usurpation of the rights of animals, organize, realize that this is a struggle for justice and join this struggle.

Volunteer for Law for Life Initiative Özge Özgüner

Translator: İpek Laçin

(This article has been produced with support from the European Union, as part of the EU's Sivil Düşün Program. The content's responsibility solely belongs to Law for Life Initiative and does not reflect the views of the EU.)