Jump to content

Great ape personhood

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected fromGreat Ape personhood)
Bonobos,members of thegreat apefamily,Hominidae

Great ape personhoodis a movement to extendpersonhoodand some legal protections to the non-humanmembers of thegreat apefamily:bonobos,chimpanzees,gorillas,andorangutans.[1][2][3]

Advocates includeprimatologistsJane GoodallandDawn Prince-Hughes,evolutionary biologistRichard Dawkins,philosophersPaola CavalieriandPeter Singer,and legal scholarSteven Wise.[4][5]

Status

[edit]
Hercules and Leohabeas corpusOrder

On February 28, 2007, the parliament of theBalearic Islands,an autonomous community ofSpain,passed the world's first legislation that would effectively grant legalpersonhoodrights to all great apes.[6]On June 25 2008, a parliamentary committee set forth resolutions urging Spain to grant the primates the right to life and liberty. If approved "it will ban harmful experiments on apes and make keeping them for circuses, television commercials, or filming illegal under Spain's penal code."[7]

In 1992,Switzerlandamended itsconstitutionto recognize animals asbeingsand notthings.[8]However, in 1999 the Swiss constitution was completely rewritten, and this distinction was removed. A decade later,Germanyguaranteed rights to animals in a 2002 constitutional amendment, the firstEuropean Unionmember to do so.[8][9][10]

New Zealandcreated specific legal protections for five great ape species in 1999.[11]The use ofgorillas,chimpanzeesandorangutansin research, testing, or teaching is limited to activities intended to benefit the animals or its species. A New Zealand animal protection group later argued the restrictions conferred weaklegal rights.[12]

Several European countries including Austria, the Netherlands, and Sweden have completelybanned the use of great apesin animal testing.[13]Austria was the first country to ban experimentation on lesser apes. UnderEU Directive 2010/63/EU,the entire European Union banned great ape experimentation in 2013.

Argentinagranted a captive orangutan basic rights in late 2014.[14]

On April 20, 2015, Justice Barbara Jaffe of New York State Supreme Court ordered a writ ofhabeas corpusto two captive chimpanzees[15][unreliable source].The next day the ruling was amended to strike the words "writ of habeas corpus".[16][17][18]

Advocacy

[edit]

Well-known advocates include primatologistJane Goodall,who was appointed a goodwill ambassador for theUnited Nationsto fight thebushmeattrade and endapeextinction;Richard Dawkins,former Professor for the Public Understanding of Science atOxford University;Peter Singer,professor of philosophy atPrinceton University;and attorney and former Harvard professorSteven Wise,founder and president of theNonhuman Rights Project(NhRP), whose aim is to use U.S. common law on a state-by-state basis to achieve recognition of legal personhood for great apes and other self-aware, autonomous non-human animals.[4][19][unreliable source]

In December 2013, the NhRP filed three lawsuits on behalf of four chimpanzees being held in captivity in New York State, arguing that they should be recognized as legal persons with the fundamental right to bodily liberty (i.e. not to be held in captivity) and that they are entitled to common law writs ofhabeas corpusand should be immediately freed and moved to sanctuaries.[20]All three petitions for writs of habeas corpus were denied, allowing for the right to appeal. The NhRP is[when?]appealing all three decisions.[21]

Goodall'slongitudinal studiesrevealed the social and family life of chimps to be similar to those of human beings. Goodall describes them as individuals, and claims they relate to her as an individual member of the clan. Laboratory studies ofape language abilityrevealed other human traits, as didgenetics,and eventually three of the great apes were reclassified ashominids.

Other studies, such as one done by Beran and Evans,[22]indicate other qualities that humans share with non-human primates, namely the ability to self-control. In order for chimpanzees to control their impulsivity, they use self-distraction techniques similar to those that are used by children. Great apes also exhibited ability to plan as well as project "oneself into the future", known as"mental time travel".Such complicated tasks require self-awareness, which great apes appear to possess: "the capacity that contribute to the ability todelay gratification,since a self-aware individual may be able to imagine future states of the self ".[23]

The recognition of great ape intelligence, alongside the increasing risk of great ape extinction, has led theanimal rightsmovement to put pressure on nations to recognize apes as having limitedrightsand being legal "persons." In response, theUnited Kingdomintroduced a ban on research using great apes, although testing on other primates has not been limited.[24]

Writer and lecturer Thomas Rose argues that granting legal rights to non-humans is not a new concept. He points out that in most of the world, "corporations are recognized as legal persons and are granted many of the same rights humans enjoy, the right to sue, to vote, and to freedom of speech."[6]Dawn Prince-Hugheshas written that great apes meet the commonly accepted standards for personhood: "self-awareness; comprehension of past, present, and future; the ability to understand complex rules and their consequences on emotional levels; the ability to choose to risk those consequences, a capacity forempathy,and the ability tothink abstractly."[25]

Gary Francionequestions the concept of granting personhood on the basis of whether the animal is human-like (as some have argued) and believessentienceshould be the sole criteria used to determine if an animal should enjoy basic rights. He asserts that several other animals, including mice and rats, should also be granted such rights.[26]

Interpretation

[edit]

Depending on the exact wording of any proposed or adopted declaration, personhood for the great apes raises questions concerning protections and obligations under national and international laws including:

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^Bhagwat, S. B.Foundation of Geology.Global Vision, 2009, pp. 232–235:
    "TheHominidaeform a taxonomic family, including four extant genera:humans,chimpanzees,gorillasandorangutans."
  2. ^Groves, Colin P."Great Apes: The Conflict of Gene-Pools, Conservation and Personhood" in Emily Rousham, Leonard Freedman, and Rayma Pervan.Perspectives in Human Biology: Humans in the Australasian Region.World Scientific, 1996, p. 31:
    "The recognition that we as a species are not phylogenetically separated from other animals, but are nested within the primate group known as the GreatApes,is no longer controversial. Goodman (1963) proposed on this basis to include thegreat apes(orangutan,gorillaandchimpanzee) in the family Hominidae, a view revived by Groves (1986) and increasingly adopted since then. Increasingly, too, the vernacular term 'Great Apes' has come to be used as a pure synonym for Hominidae, so that humans are also 'Great Apes.' The only remaining systemic controversy seems to be whether chimpanzees and gorillas together form the sister-group of humans, or chimpanzees and humans together constitute the sister-group of gorillas. "
  3. ^Karcher, Karen. "The Great Ape Project" inMarc Bekoff(ed.).The Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare.Greenwood, 2009, pp. 185–187:
    "The Great Ape Project (GAP) seeks to extend the scope of three basic moral principles to all members of what the GAP founders call the five greatapespecies (humans,chimpanzees,gorillasandorangutans). "
  4. ^abGoodall, Jane in Paola Cavalieri & Peter Singer (eds.)The Great Ape Project: Equality Beyond Humanity.St Martin's Griffin, 1994. (ISBN031211818X)
  5. ^Motavalli, Jim."Rights from Wrongs. A Movement to Grant Legal Protection to Animals is Gathering Force",E Magazine,March/April 2003.
  6. ^abThomas Rose (2 August 2007)."Going ape over human rights".CBC News. Archived fromthe originalon 2010-02-03.Retrieved26 June2008.
  7. ^"Spanish parliament to extend rights to apes".Reuters.25 June 2008.Retrieved2008-07-11.
  8. ^ab"Germany guarantees animal rights in constitution".Associated Press. 2002-05-18.Retrieved2008-06-26.
  9. ^"Germany guarantees animal rights".CNN. 21 June 2002.Retrieved2008-06-26.
  10. ^Kate Connolly (2002-06-22)."German animals given legal rights".The Guardian.Retrieved2008-06-26.[dead link]
  11. ^"Animal Welfare Act 1999 No 142 (as at 08 September 2018), Public Act 85 Restrictions on use of non-human hominids – New Zealand Legislation".legislation.govt.nz.Retrieved2019-07-02.
  12. ^"A STEP AT A TIME: NEW ZEALAND'S PROGRESS TOWARD HOMINID RIGHTS" BY ROWAN TAYLORArchivedJuly 28, 2013, at theWayback Machine
  13. ^"Bundesgesetz, mit dem das Tierversuchsgesetz 1989 über Tierversuche an lebenden Tieren".Archivedfrom the original on 2016-03-03.Retrieved2013-07-31.
  14. ^Giménez, Emiliano (January 4, 2015)."Argentine orangutan granted unprecedented legal rights".edition.cnn.com.CNN Espanol.RetrievedApril 21,2015.
  15. ^"Judge Recognizes Two Chimpanzees as Legal Persons, Grants them Writ of Habeas Corpus".nonhumanrightsproject.org.Nonhuman Rights Project.April 20, 2015. Archived fromthe originalon September 9, 2016.RetrievedApril 21,2015.
  16. ^"Judge Barbara Jaffe's amended court order"(PDF).iapps.courts.state.ny.us.New York Supreme Court.April 21, 2015. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on April 30, 2015.RetrievedApril 21,2015.
  17. ^"Judge Orders Stony Brook University to Defend Its Custody of 2 Chimps".The New York Times.April 21, 2015.RetrievedApril 21,2015.
  18. ^David KravetsArs Technica(8/3/2015) No habeas corpus; chimps are lab “property”: "Animals, including chimpanzees," judge rules, "are considered property."
  19. ^"Nonhuman Rights Project".
  20. ^Charles Siebert (23 April 2014)."Should a Chimp Be Able to Sue Its Owner?".New York Times Magazine.
  21. ^Robert Gavin (3 October 2014)."Appeals panel to weigh personhood for chimpanzee".Times Union.
  22. ^Beran MJ; Evans TA (2006). "Maintenance of delay of gratification by four chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): the effects of delayed reward visibility, experimenter presence, and extended delay intervals".Behavioural Processes.73(3): 315–24.doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2006.07.005.PMID16978800.S2CID33431269.
  23. ^Heilbronner, S.; Platt, M. L. (4 December 2007)."Animal Cognition: Time Flies When Chimps Are Having Fun".Current Biology.17(23): R1008–R1010.Bibcode:2007CBio...17R1008H.doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.10.012.PMID18054760.S2CID296013.
  24. ^Alok Jha (2005-12-05)."RSPCA outrage as experiments on animals rise to 2.85m".The Guardian.Retrieved2008-06-26.
  25. ^Prince-Hughes, Dawn(1987).Songs of the Gorilla Nation.Harmony. p.138.ISBN1-4000-5058-8.
  26. ^Francione, Gary (2006)."The Great Ape Project: Not so Great".Retrieved2010-03-22.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Great_ape_personhood&oldid=1251039164"