(MY) Trade and CITES

[Guest guest]

Columns - The New Straits Times

 

EDITORIAL: Cited for the wrong reasons

 

DEC 9:

--

 

A MAJOR disadvantage of such an open trading economy as ours is that

nasty things can slip in between the free and legitimate exchange of

goods.

Malaysia has been accused of being an entrepot for drugs, a clearing

house for human trafficking and a modern-day East India Company for

pirated and counterfeit products. These have been sharply attended to

in law and enforcement by the authorities, on their own and in league

with international agencies. But one area of notoriety has stood out

like a tiger's amputated paw — the illegal wildlife trade. Not

surprisingly, our strategic location and proximity to some of the

richest natural habitats are once again turning it into a hub for

transnational crime.

 

No one really knows how much of the illegal trading is going on. NGOs

and conservationists think that newspaper reports of smuggled species

and confiscated bush meat are only the tip of the iceberg. The

National Parks and Wildlife Department can only guess at the extent by

noting how busy its officers have been in the past few years. A

slightly clearer picture can be drawn from what is known about the

market. In October, for example, after someone in Kelantan was caught

with the chopped-up carcass of a tiger in his fridge, the price of the

endangered animal was put at RM30,000. Using extrapolations like this,

experts put the value of the illegal wildlife trade as second only to

drugs. But arguments about supply and demand, or the hit rate of an

admittedly sparse enforcement net may well be moot. As long as there

are people willing to pay for exotic animals as pets, delicacies,

adornments or trophies, it is unlikely the buying and selling will

stop.

 

The answer lies in CITES (Convention on International Trade in

Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna), a compromise between

animal-rights advocates who favour a prohibition on any trade in

wildlife, and those who say that some trade, or " sustainable use " , is

the only way of ensuring long-term survival of lucrative species. As

the 12th most biodiverse country on earth, Malaysia has an interest in

embracing CITES. Yet, it hasn't done so, only managing a " category

two " compliance with the 169-party global agreement to control the

wheeling and dealing in protected animals and plants.

 

Not that the country is short of laws. They are, however, unevenly

distributed among the various States and authorities, leaving gaps big

enough to let the poachers through. The Natural Resources and

Environment Ministry is drafting an omnibus Act to bring the various

bits of legislation under one roof, with its bolts tightened by CITES

requirements covering cross-border trade. Does this reflect a more

committed conversion to conservation or fear of being dropped from the

international framework? Perhaps a little of both. What is certain is

unless the country moves to the forefront of the CITES initiative, it

will be cited for not doing enough to protect its God-given wealth,

and for one day losing its abundance to the bloody work of felons.