- Advertisement -
That was New York’s State Court of Appeals decision in a 5-2 vote on Tuesday.
After months of advocacy for animal rights by the Nonhuman Rights Group (NRG) on behalf of Happy, an Asian elephant at the Bronx Zoo, the court handed down its ruling on Tuesday. They said that she is not a person, and therefore not entitled to basic human rights.
Happy was captured when she was about a year old, brought to the US, and has been living at the Bronx Zoo in New York City for about 45 years. Although not living in the wild, she is said to be well cared for and has two acres of natural space to wander around, shared with another Asian elephant, Patty, although separated by a fence for safety reasons. The NRG wants her moved to an elephant sanctuary.
“She’s a depressed, screwed-up elephant,” Steven Wise, the group’s founder, said in an interview before the ruling was announced.
The group said that the Asian elephant was being illegally detained and filed a writ of habeas corpus. It fought for Happy’s right to be free. People (some) have these rights – in the US guaranteed by habeas corpus, the right to not be illegally detained, but should animals?
Do animals of higher intelligence have the right to determine their own destiny?
The animal rights group asserts that elephants show a sense of self-awareness, and should be granted the right of self-determination. The same thing could be said about apes and other species. Theoretically, it could extend to dogs and cats, who some owners would say are more intelligent than some people they know. Pets can recognize words and follow commands.
“While no one disputes the impressive capabilities of elephants, we reject petitioner’s arguments that it is entitled to seek the remedy of habeas corpus on Happy’s behalf,” Janet DiFiore, the chief judge, wrote. “Habeas corpus is a procedural vehicle intended to secure the liberty rights of human beings who are unlawfully restrained, not nonhuman animals.”
- Advertisement -