Legal Accountability For Animal Cruelty In Entertainment: A Comparative Study Of Laws
- IJLLR Journal
- 2 days ago
- 2 min read
Poornalakshmi S. Bhat, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
ABSTRACT
This paper provides a comparative analysis of the manner in which cruelty on animals in the entertainment sector is handled in India, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States of America (US), and how the alignment of the national frameworks with international animal welfare standards. The study examines the laws that govern the use of animals in entertainment across each jurisdiction, including circuses, films, and performances, along with the primary enforcement agencies and mechanisms, penalties for infractions, and pertinent judicial precedents. In India, this encompasses the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act 1960 along with its Performing Animals Rules, and regulations regarding cinematography, as well as landmark cases like N.R. Nair v. Union of India (2000) and the Animal Welfare Board of India v. Nagaraja (2014), which prohibited bull-taming sports on grounds of cruelty. In the UK, the relevant legal frameworks related to the subject matter are the Animal Welfare Act 2006, the Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act 1937, which prohibits films in which animals are subjected to cruelty, and the Wild Animals in Circuses Act 2019, which prohibits performances involving wild animals in traveling circuses. In the US, the regulatory environment is founded on the federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and Endangered Species Act, along with various state laws; however, many animals are not protected by the AWA, with birds and farm animals being the biggest gaps in coverage. Additionally, the paper also assesses how the legal frameworks of each country align with those set by the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) and CITES trade regulations, and the non-binding Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare (UDAW). The comparison shows notable disparities where the UK has mostly eliminated wild-animal acts, India has enacted partial bans, and the US faces significant pressure among civil societies but relies heavily on weakly implemented federal laws. The paper wraps up with specific recommendations wherein India and the US ought to bolster enforcement and remedy legislative gaps, the UK should ensure that existing prohibitions are effectively enacted, and all three nations should better align with WOAH recommendations and promote the adoption of UDAW principles.
Keywords: Animal cruelty, entertainment industry, comparative law, animal welfare standards, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Animal Welfare Act, CITES, WOAH.
