FWD: Shackled by the law

[Guest guest]

***************************Advertisement***************************

eCentral - Your Entertainment Guide

http://www.star-ecentral.com

 

 

*****************************************************************

This message was forwarded to you by yitzeling.

 

Comment from sender:

 

 

This article is from The Star Online (http://thestar.com.my)

URL:

http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2004/4/20/features/7783540 & sec=f\

eatures

 

________________________

 

Tuesday April 20, 2004

Shackled by the law

By HILARY CHIEW

 

THERE was a glimmer of hope in February that the four baby gorillas illegally

acquired by Taiping Zoo would get a chance to return to their homeland in

Cameroon.

 

Cameroonian Environment and Forestry Minister Oben Tanyi-Mbianyor held a

private meeting with then Science, Technology and Environment Minister Datuk

Seri Law Hieng Ding on the sideline of the 7th Conference of Parties to the

Convention on Biological Diversity (COP7 CBD) hosted by Malaysia from Feb 9 to

27.

 

On Feb 21, Tanyi-Mbianyor had earnestly requested for the gorillas to be

returned to his country as opposed to the Malaysian Government’s decision to

send the animals to Pretoria Zoo in Pretoria, 50km north of Johannesburg, South

Africa. He did not want the matter to be publicised as he was hoping that the

diplomatic channel would work. But unfortunately his efforts had been in vain.

 

The four gorillas, dubbed the Taiping Four, had landed in Pretoria Zoo on April

15.

 

They were brought into Malaysia in 2002, disguised as captive-bred specimens in

a purported animal exchange programme with Nigeria.

 

Under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites),

Resolution 10.7 (Annex 1), which governs the disposal of confiscated animals

arising from illegal trade, states: “Where the country of origin desires return

of the animals, this desire should be respected.”

 

In fact, as early as November 2002, a joint statement was issued by Nigeria and

Cameroon at the 12th Conference of Parties of Cites in Santiago, Chile, in which

the two Central African Governments called for a DNA analysis of the gorillas to

determine their place of origin. The statement also asked for them to be

returned to Cameroon if indeed they belonged to the western lowland gorilla

species which originated from Cameroon. However, no DNA analysis was carried

out.

 

Investigations in Nigeria confirmed that the babies were poached from the

Cameroonian forests, smuggled into Nigeria and laundered as captive-bred

specimens by the University Zoo of Ibadan.

 

Tanyi-Mbianyor followed up with a letter to Law requesting for the animals to

be sent to a gorilla rehabilitation sanctuary following the Cabinet’s

announcement to hand over the primates to Pretoria Zoo last July.

 

The announcement was greeted with strong criticism from the primate

conservation community which charged that it would send the wrong message to

wildlife traders and unscrupulous zoos, that laws could be manipulated to

acquire endangered species. They also hit out at Pretoria Zoo’s vested interest

in the four young gorillas to replenish its gorilla gene pool and to boost the

zoo’s profile.

 

The International Primate Protection League (IPPL), the Pan African Sanctuary

Alliance and the Jane Goodall’s Institute had rallied behind the Limbe Wildlife

Sanctuary in Cameroon, saying that the Sanctuary was the ideal temporary home

for the gorillas and that the primates would stand a better chance of returning

to the wild in the future.

 

The proponents had submitted a declaration of support signed by 65 conservation

and animal welfare organisations to both Tanyi-Mbianyor and Law. The declaration

applauded the stand taken by the Cameroonian Government in protecting its

wildlife by asking for the return of the four animals and urged for further

investigation into the matter.

 

Controversial choice

 

It is perplexing why Malaysia failed to consider Cameroon’s request.

 

An inside source said the eleventh-hour appeal by the Cameroonian minister

could not have come at a worst time as the country was gearing up for the

general elections and politicians like Law were preoccupied with election

matters.

 

“Perhilitan officials were eager to close the file as quickly as possible. The

Cabinet’s nod to the Pretoria plan sealed the fate of the gorillas,” he added.

 

Perhilitan enforcement director Misliah Mohd Basir said the disposal plan was

based on Cites regulations that allowed the animals to be placed at any

appropriate centre, and that the final decision rests with the country which had

confiscated the animals.

 

She questioned why the Government’s decision was criticised while it had always

been Perhilitan’s practice to deliver confiscated specimens to its rescue centre

at Malacca Zoo.

 

“By right, the same procedure should follow for the gorillas too. (Of course),

since the gorillas are a high-profile species, the common practice could not be

followed,” she added.

 

“The choice of Pretoria was as advised by the Cites secretariat.”

 

Cites senior enforcement officer John Sellar, however, maintained that the

secretariat neither endorsed nor questioned the final decision but noted that it

complied with the convention’s guidance.

 

Sellar said both offers from the Pretoria Zoo and Limbe Wildlife Sanctuary were

passed on to Perhilitan.

 

The secretariat had distanced itself from the discussion on the most suitable

long-term home for the gorillas as proponents of the zoo and sanctuary option

engaged in fierce debates over the last one year.

 

However, it was understood that some time in January, the secretariat had for

an unknown reason requested Malaysia to review its decision but the intervention

was deemed too late by Perhilitan.

 

Misled again?

 

Law had lamented that he was misled into signing the import permit that

facilitated the importation of the gorillas and argued that whatever decision

reached was in the best interest of the animals.

 

In announcing the Cabinet’s decision, Law said Pretoria Zoo was picked based on

its sound financial status, its commitment to cooperate in the breeding of

gorillas through its membership in the Conservation Breeding Specialist Group

and its facilities and expertise.

 

He said he was convinced by the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (Waza),

which claimed that the zoo had a decade’s experience in breeding gorillas.

 

Pretoria Zoo’s supposedly good track record was challenged. IPPL’s chairman Dr

Shirley McGreal revealed that three out of four adult gorillas in the zoo,

acquired from the wild, died between 1995 and 1998, while two newborns also died

within six and 17 days in 1989 and 1990 respectively. One of the babies had a

fractured skull, raising doubts of the zoo’s capability in caring for the

gorillas. Its remaining male has been alone for six years and there is concern

if he would accept any newcomers.

 

Following this revelation, a senior ministry official expressed concern that it

was likely that the minister was not given the full information to help him

reach the right decision.

 

South Africa’s Environment and Tourism Affairs Minister Valli Moosa said in an

interview during COP7 CBD that he was not aware of Pretoria Zoo’s dismal record,

and claimed that the decision was approved by Cites.

 

The selection of South Africa as the recipient of the four gorillas infuriated

the conservation community which had pointed out South Africa’s role in

facilitating the illegal passage of the gorillas in January 2002.

 

McGreal had criticised South Africa’s Cites management for its lack of scrutiny

on wildlife consignment in transit and the use of the national carrier South

African Airways in transporting the primates from Nigeria to Johannesburg and

onward to Bangkok where the consignment was flown by a joint-carrier service

operated by Malaysia Airlines and Thai Airways into Penang airport.

 

McGreal pointed out that the Pretoria solution was a blow to Cameroon which had

established two sanctuaries for gorillas rescued from illegal traders.

 

Bilateral agreement

 

Primate conservationists like McGreal are weary of the agreement reached

between Malaysia and South Africa. She had questioned an earlier plan to strike

a bilateral agreement with the recipient of the Taiping Four which included the

return of their offspring to Malaysia.

 

She said such a plan would make a mockery of Cites which strived to prevent

commercial exploitation of animals as it was detrimental to their survival in

the wild.

 

The Cites secretariat had made it clear that it would not be appropriate for

anyone involved in this illegal trade to benefit from it, now or in the future.

 

Misliah said Perhilitan would be signing a memorandum of understanding with

Pretoria Zoo pertaining to exchange of technical expertise in breeding programme

as well as animal exchange. The contents of the MOU have yet to be finalised.

 

Another bone of contention is that personnel implicated in the case were not

prosecuted despite repeated calls by the Cites secretariat and conservation

groups to punish the culprits.

 

Sellar said Cites had asked Perhilitan to conduct a thorough investigation into

the illegal transaction and prosecute those responsible for violating the

national laws relating to implementation of Cites regulations.

 

Although the international agreement is non-binding, signatories are obliged to

enact national legislation that adopts the Cites provisions.

 

In Nigeria, a presidential commission’s inquiry had resulted in the sacking of

several key personnel implicated in the illegal trade of the four baby gorillas

poached from the forests of neighbouring Cameroon.

 

It is learnt that in the course of invetigations, Perhilitan has been

frustrated by its laws which do not provide for prosecution against concealment

of information.

 

An inside source said there was no relevant section under the Wildlife

Protection Act 1972 whereby Taiping Zoo director Dr Kevin Lazarus could be taken

to task for misleading the authorities. Handicapped by the law, the director was

issued a strong warning letter instead.

 

Dr Lazarus, in his application for import permit, had claimed that the gorillas

were captive-bred.

 

Misliah acknowledged the shortcomings in the law and pledged to look into it,

adding that procedures involving animal exchanges between zoos would be

tightened in future.

 

Indeed, this whole unpleasant episode should serve as a lesson and we should

not drag our feet in pushing for the amendments to the Wildlife Protection Act

1972.<p>

 

________________________

Your one-stop information portal:

The Star Online

http://thestar.com.my

http://biz.thestar.com.my

http://classifieds.thestar.com.my

http://cards.thestar.com.my

http://search.thestar.com.my

http://star-motoring.com

http://star-space.com

http://star-jobs.com

http://star-ecentral.com

http://star-techcentral.com

 

1995-2003 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd. All rights reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written

permission of Star Publications is prohibited.