Animal Rights are People’s Obligation: Discussion in Yerevan

During a regular meeting of the “Small Council” in Yerevan, discussed were human and animal rights, both of which are marked on the same day: Dec. 10.

Political analyst Edgar Vardanyan suggested to differentiate between natural, inalienable human rights (civil rights) and political rights. Inalienable rights are those rights which span everyone without exception. However, regardless of whether we accept these rights as given to us by god or not, they are put into effect only when there is an effective system of rights’ recognition and defense. Such systems work only in democratic, constitutional countries.

Political rights are those which refer to a certain group of people. They include natural justice (procedural fairness) in laws, such as the rights of the accused, including the right to a fair trial; due process; the right to seek redress or a legal remedy; and rights of participation in civil society and politics such as freedom of association, the right to assembly, the right to petition and the right to vote. 

Animal rights defender Lala Poghosyan noted that in viewing the issue as such, it’s easier to understand the natural rights of animals, particularly those that have a nervous system. Such rights of animals such as the right to life and life free of suffering. Animal rights have long been outlined in international agreements and decisions, but it remains for societies and countries to ratify them, as one of the last stages of establishing the system of universal values. 

There are different approaches to protecting the rights of animals that exist in the world today. In some countries, animals are recognized as a subject of right, while in other countries, particularly in the CIS states including Armenia, animals are simply objects of right and belong to someone or another. But in both cases the rights of animals can be maintained only by people. In any case, such difference between approaches is essential in the case of responding to crimes. If an animal is owned by someone, then brutality toward the animal is viewed only as damage to the individual’s property; however, in those countries, where animals are regarded as subjects (rather than objects), the law is stricter against such offenders and prison time might sometimes be used as a form of punishment.  

Art critic Nazaret Karoyan proposed to consider animal protection not as a right, but as people’s obligation since man has declared himself to have domain over nature (and living things) and bears the responsibility for the entire animal kingdom. 

Artist Arman Grigoryan proposed even giving animals the right to property, for example, their property could be their body or their area.

This article was written by Lala Poghosyan in original Armenian (translated into English by Epress.am).