Suit champions chimp's right to not be held as a pet

[Mark]

Suit champions chimp's right to not be held as a pet

A first-of-its-kind lawsuit filed Monday asks a judge to free a chimpanzee that a lawyer says is being held against his will as a pet in New York.

Tommy, who lives with a couple who have a reindeer farm in Gloversville, N.Y., is illegally imprisoned and under New York law has the right to live a more "chimpanzee-like" life at a sanctuary, says attorney Steven Wise, president of the Nonhuman Rights Project.

The lawsuit accuses Patrick and Diane Lavery of holding Tommy, a 26-year-old chimp, captive. The Laverys are "detaining Tommy in solitary confinement in a small, dank, cement cage in a cavernous dark shed" at their property, the lawsuit says.

Chimpanzees can make choices and, like humans, have an interest in freedom to live as they wish, Wise says. "It would seem exceedingly unlikely that any chimpanzee would choose to live life in a cave."

Patrick Lavery says Tommy is one of 11 chimps he has rescued from abusive or neglectful homes and cared for until they could be relocated to sanctuaries. Tommy, the last of the 11, has lived with them for more than a decade while they search for an appropriate place for him near enough to the couples' Ocala, Fla., farm so they can visit him, he said.

"He's actually my favorite. He's so attached to us. When we get home, he'll be so excited to see us," Lavery said from Florida.

The cage in New York where Tommy now lives exceeds federal and state standards and is inspected every year, he said. One wall of the cage opens to an outdoor area. This time of year, Tommy stays inside in a building heated to 70 degrees with concrete walls decorated with flowers and trees to look like a jungle, Lavery says. "The chimp has color TV and cable," Lavery said. "He watches cartoons."

"I've got 20 years experience with chimpanzees. We're not just some Joe Blow on the street who just happens to have a chimpanzee," Lavery said. "I've had animals all my life, horses, dogs reindeer. It's not a fly-by-night operation."

The Nonhuman Rights Project, represented by Wise, has asked a New York civil court for a writ of habeas corpus for Tommy, arguing that New York laws "do not limit legal personhood to homo sapiens." The lawsuit notes that, in the past, the court has decided legal issues involving other domestic animals.

State law allows any person unlawfully detained to seek a writ of habeas corpus that requires the jailers to prove the basis for the detention. New York issued such writs for slaves, not considered people under the laws of the time, to determine whether the slaves should be returned to their purported owners or given freedom, the lawsuit argues.

"Not long ago, people generally agreed that human slaves could not be legal persons, but were simply the property of their owners," Wise said. "We will assert, based on clear scientific evidence, that it's time to take the next step and recognize that these non-human animals cannot continue to be exploited as the property of their human owners."

The Nonhuman Rights Project intends to file two additional lawsuits to free two male chimpanzees, Hercules and Leo, allegedly owned by New Iberia Research Center and used in locomotion research by the anatomy department at Stony Brook University in Stony Brook, N.Y., and Kiko, a 26-year-old chimpanzee living on private property in Niagara Falls, Wise says.

Wise wants the chimps to be released to a sanctuary where the animals can live among other chimps in a more natural setting.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/02/lawyer-sues-to-free-chimps/3785825/

[Mark]

Captive orangutan has human right to freedom, Argentine court rules

BUENOS AIRES (Reuters) - An orangutan held in an Argentine zoo can be freed and transferred to a sanctuary after a court recognized the ape as a "non-human person" unlawfully deprived of its freedom, local media reported on Sunday.

Animal rights campaigners filed a habeas corpus petition - a document more typically used to challenge the legality of a person's detention or imprisonment - in November on behalf of Sandra, a 29-year-old Sumatran orangutan at the Buenos Aires zoo.

In a landmark ruling that could pave the way for more lawsuits, the Association of Officials and Lawyers for Animal Rights (AFADA) argued the ape had sufficient cognitive functions and should not be treated as an object.

The court agreed Sandra, born into captivity in Germany before being transferred to Argentina two decades ago, deserved the basic rights of a "non-human person."

"This opens the way not only for other Great Apes, but also for other sentient beings which are unfairly and arbitrarily deprived of their liberty in zoos, circuses, water parks and scientific laboratories," the daily La Nacion newspaper quoted AFADA lawyer Paul Buompadre as saying.

Orangutan is a word from the Malay and Indonesian languages that means "forest man."

Sandra's case is not the first time activists have sought to use the habeas corpus writ to secure the release of wild animals from captivity.

A U.S. court this month tossed out a similar bid for the freedom of 'Tommy' the chimpanzee, privately owned in New York state, ruling the chimp was not a "person" entitled to the rights and protections afforded by habeas corpus.

In 2011, the animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) filed a lawsuit against marine park operator SeaWorld, alleging five wild-captured orca whales were treated like slaves. A San Diego court dismissed the case.

The Buenos Aires zoo has 10 working days to seek an appeal.

A spokesman for the zoo declined to comment to Reuters. The zoo's head of biology, Adrian Sestelo, told La Nacion that orangutans were by nature calm, solitary animals which come together only to mate and care for their young.

"When you don't know the biology of a species, to unjustifiably claim it suffers abuse, is stressed or depressed, is to make one of man's most common mistakes, which is to humanize animal behavior," Sestelo told the daily.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/captive-orangutan-human-freedom-argentine-court-rules-203651528.html

[Mark]

U.S. judge temporarily grants habeas corpus to chimps in step forward for animal rights

Two chimpanzees from Long Island New York are about to have their day in court. Legal representatives for the two chimps say the animals have been "unlawfully detained" by Stony Brook University.

New York State Supreme Court Justice Barbara Jaffe considers the chimpanzees to be "legal persons" in the eyes of the law. With the help of legal representation, the chimps are being empowered with rights of their own and could ultimately be freed from captivity by the court.

Justice Barbara Jaffe has granted a "writ of habeas corpus" and is ordering officials at Stony Brook University to show cause for why they are holding the chimps, Hercules and Leo, in captivity.

Judge retracts her statement which temporarily made the chimps "legal persons"
When word got around that a couple of chimpanzees had been granted human rights by a court of law, Justice Jaffe clarified her statements, striking down the "writ of habeas corpus" which theoretically gave the chimps the same rights as humans. Striking down her initial wording, she said it was simply a way to formally direct the university officials to the courtroom to present their case.
The Nonhuman Rights Project, which signed off on the judge's order, saw a first-time glimpse of what they work so hard for - court recognized animal rights. They believe that some animals, like chimps, are "legal persons" with the right of "bodily liberty."

Do chimps have the same "bodily liberty" rights as humans?
The question being raised is this: Are chimps the property of human owners or do the animals have the right to own their own body and liberty? Does an animal have the same rights as humans? If they are being harmed, abused, or detained, can they be represented in court and ultimately be freed?

The Nonhuman Rights Project seeks to free Hercules and Leo from their cages at Stony Brook in hopes they will be released to an animal sanctuary in Florida. However, if the chimps are indeed property of Stony Brook and no harm can be proven, then can the court order the animals be taken away from their owners?

"Nonhuman animals do not have legal rights any more than they have legal responsibilities," said Bob Kohn, a lawyer from Manhattan, who opposes efforts to give human rights to chimps and other animals. "For a court to hold otherwise would have tremendous adverse legal and moral implications for mankind."

Those who support animal rights say it's not about declaring that animals are people. Nonhuman Rights Project director Natalie K. Prosin says it's more so about recognizing that animals are "autonomous beings, who are self-aware and self-directed."

Agreeing with Prosin is Laurence H. Tribe, a Harvard Law School scholar, who believes that habeas corpus should be available to animals to test the treatment and confinement of "other beings whose capacities are limited but who are potentially capable of bearing rights."

Speaking in Science Magazine, Prosin said, "This is a big step forward to getting what we are ultimately seeking: The right to bodily liberty for chimpanzees and other cognitively complex animals. We got our foot in the door. And no matter what happens, that door can never be completely shut again."

While the incident is a huge step forward for animal rights, the judge could very well hear Stony Brook's side and ultimately rule they have the right to keep the chimps in their lab.

Sources:

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/050476_animal_rights_chimps_testing.html#ixzz3gXoTfwj3