A 21-year-old hawker who used depression as an excuse to torture and kill three kittens was last month fined RM400 by the magistrate’s court. Magistrate Nik Mohd Fadli Nik Azlan fined Chow Xiao Wei the maximum allowable fine of RM200 for each of the charges. Slapping her with only a fine in lieu of the three kittens’ Chow murdered is definitely justice at its worst!
The cruelty by Chow came to light when the video of her torturing the kittens was discovered on Facebook, the social media site. A livid animal lover decided to bring her to book by sparking an online hunt to discover Chow’s identity.
The terrified Chow rushed to seek help from DAP assemblyperson, Ean Yong Hian Wah to whom she admitted her crime, blaming it on depression that came about after her parents’ divorced.
Only time will tell whether the miserable fine of RM400 has made Chow respect all living beings. But then the existing law has for a long time now been dismissing animal rights as frivolous, giving the impression that the price of a street cat or dog is dirt cheap compared to the crime done against them.
The crimes against animals in this country is painfully troubling. Last year, an elderly woman was traumatised when the Ipoh City Council put to sleep her loyal and licensed therapy dog. The council tried to absolve itself by saying it thought the dog was a street animal.
In March last year too, a concerned citizen wrote a letter to a news portal depicting the horror of witnessing a dog being abused at the Kepong central KTM station by Kuala Lumpur City Hall workers who tied the dog to a grille and shoved a piece of wood down it’s throat.
The dog was bleeding and surrounded by its faeces. Its suffering did not bother these City Hall workers who were more concerned about sprucing up the area in preparation for a visit by a Cabinet minister.
The workers escaped punishment. Why were they not punished? Was the dog’s life not precious and wothy of respect?
In 2005, The Star reported a cat breeder was charged in court with neglecting his cats by forcing them to lie inside small cages alongside their faeces, resulting in an unbearable stench.
In another incident in Johor Baru, five men armed with sticks attacked several street cats and dogs under the care of the Johor Baru Humane Touch Animal Welfare Society in Taman Delima.
Yet, another case involved the Kuala Langat District Council which was reported to have killed nine pedigree dogs without any veterinary assessment.
In spite of all these cases, the Veterinary Services Department (VSD) is not willing to learn from its mistakes, the most painful, literally, involving a German Shepherd pet dog called Sheena. It was 1995 and she was left to die by her heartless owner after he shifted home, abandoning the dog in the previous house, devoid of clean water and food.
Calls made by a concerned resident to VSD to rescue Sheena were ignored, causing Sheena her dear life.
On Jan 27 this year, the VSD director-general Dr Abdul Aziz Jamaluddin declared that the Animal Act would be amended, to increase the existing fine of RM200 to RM50,000. The six-month jail term, however, remains.
Abdul Aziz’s justification for the increase in fine was that the existing RM200 had outlived its effectiveness.
“We feel it does not serve as a deterrent,” he had said. As for the six-month jail time, Abdul Aziz had this to say: “We believe the current penalty of six months’ imprisonment is enough for culprits to realise their mistake.”
It is annoying to sense the smugness in Abdul Aziz’s words. Was the RM200 fine not pittance in Sheena’s case? Her owner of seven years got off with a RM100 fine for torturing the dog to death, while the loyal Sheena lost her life, due to starvation and pain. So much for justice done!
A mere RM100 in fine in default of two days’ jail was all its owner Lien Chong San received, no thanks to Section 44 (1) (d) of the Animal Ordinance 1953.
Lien, like Chow, was not barred for life from adopting pets nor was he compelled to do community service at animal shelters – proof that Malaysia’s Animal Act is nothing but a toothless tiger, failing time and again to provide justice to abused animals, many whom end up dead.
Since 1953, only two or three animal abusers were jailed and that too, not exceeding two days! The government passed the new Animal Act 2006 but not a single provision of the Animal Ordinance 1953 was changed.
Why was the fine not raised when the ordinance was amended in 2006?
The VSD’s couldn’t care less attitude raises the question as to whether what really is the department’s role and responsibility? Is it not to ensure that the animals rights are respected and protected?
Instead of taking its responsibility with such indifference, the VSD could do better by looking at the laws adopted by other countries.
India, for example, is leading in the rising number of convictions for animal abuse and with stiff penalties. One court in India stopped the bullock cart race held during the temple festivals because the cows are beaten with sticks to force them to move faster.
In UAE, the laws protect both domestic pets and street animals. Abuse of an animal is punishable with a jail term of up to one year and a fine of not more than RM10,000 or both.
Hong Kong had some years back passed The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Amendment) Bill 2006 to put in place stiffer penalties for animal cruelty; the fine was raised from US$641 to US$25,641 plus three years imprisonment.
The Hong Kong government went a step further and set up a hotline to report animal abuse. Its people can also call the police who are given the authority to arrest animal abusers.
It is a shame that both the VSD and the government could not care less about animal rights in Malaysia. To the London-based 124-year-old The Mayhew Animal Home and Humane Education Centre, these cases of animal abuse showed Malaysia’s lack of respect for its animals. The centre, sadly, is accurate in its assessment of animal welfare in Malaysia.
The Animal Act 1953 gives the veterinary department and the police power to arrest without warrant any person caught abusing an animal as stated under Section 44. Why is this provision under the Act not being enforced by both authorities?
The RM50,000 fine alone is not going to improve the situation. Instead of being jailed, such offenders must be sentenced to do community service, spending many hours working at animal shelters. If that fails to raise their conscience, such people should never again be allowed to adopt pets.
The VSD must also keep a record of people who adopt animals to ensure only the right profiles are allowed to keep pets and act as their guardians. Perpetrators who disrespect animal lives must never be allowed the joy of enjoying the company of a pet, a severe lesson for the cruelty they have meted out to these creatures.
Come Oct 4 when the world celebrates World Animal Day, how does Malaysia intend to commemorate this day? Or does it even remember such a day exists?
Jeswan Kaur is a freelance writer
via kl-today.com
