**********************************
Following is a question by the Hon Michael Tien and a reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Dr Ko Wing-man, in the Legislative Council today (November 6):
Question:
The main piece of the existing legislation on the prevention of cruelty to animals is the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (the Ordinance), under which the maximum penalty for the relevant offences is a fine of HK$200,000 and imprisonment for three years. Officers from various government departments, including police officers, senior veterinary officers, health officers, health inspectors and certain officers from the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD), have been authorised to enforce the Ordinance. In addition, the Police, in collaboration with AFCD, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Hong Kong), veterinary associations and animal concern groups, introduced the Animal Watch Scheme (the Scheme) in 2011 to fight against cruelty to animals through a four-pronged approach of education, publicity, intelligence gathering and investigation, and encourage the public to participate in the Scheme. Although, with the introduction of the Scheme, the Police received a total of 63 cases of cruelty to animals last year, or three cases fewer than the year before, while the detection rate increased from the 17% to 30% in the same period, incidents of negligence of care or abandonment of pets, or ill-treatment of animals with intention or even brutally torturing them to death, etc. are still reported in the media from time to time and the situation seems to be worsening. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council of:
(a) the number of cases in which animals were not well taken care of or abused due to the closedown of animal breeding grounds or pet shops and the number of animals involved in each case in the past three years; if such data are not available, of the reasons for that;
(b) the specific work that the authorities have carried out in respect of the four aspects of education, publicity, intelligence gathering and investigation since the introduction of the Scheme, as well as the effectiveness of the work; and
(c) the number of prosecutions instituted under the Ordinance, the penalties generally imposed by the court on the convicted persons and the number of animals involved in the cases concerned in the past three years; whether the authorities will consider increasing the maximum penalties for animal cruelty offences to enhance the deterrent effect?
Reply:
President,
Currently, a number of government departments and organisations are involved in handling animal cruelty cases. For the purpose of enhancing co-operation among the government departments and organisations concerned, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD), in conjunction with the Hong Kong Police Force (Police), the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Hong Kong) (SPCA), set up a working group in 2011 to examine the work on handling such cases. The Police, in collaboration with AFCD, SPCA, veterinary associations and animal concern groups, introduced the Animal Watch Scheme in 2011 to fight against animal cruelty cases through a four-pronged approach covering education, publicity, intelligence gathering and investigation. The Scheme aims at strengthening Police efforts in the investigation of such cases. Enhancing co-operation between the Police and different organisations and promoting wider public involvement will enable more effective prevention and investigation of animal cruelty cases.
My reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:
(a) We note that a recent animal cruelty case was related to the closedown of a pet shop. Experience shows that cases of cruelty to animals or negligence usually do not occur immediately after the closedown of animal breeding premises or pet shops, but a period of time after the operators or their friends have brought the animals home when they find themselves unable to look after the animals. Unnecessary suffering is inflicted as a result. Since such acts of cruelty are usually caused by a number of factors, such as the financial situation of the animal keepers, the Government cannot provide a breakdown.
(b) Since the introduction of the Animal Watch Scheme, the Police, in collaboration with AFCD, SPCA and veterinary associations, has been combating cruelty to animals through the four-pronged approach of education, publicity, intelligence gathering and investigation. I will give an account of the work involved and the overall effectiveness of the Scheme.
Public education is the key to safeguarding and promoting animal welfare. To this end, AFCD has established a dedicated team to devise, implement and fortify public education and publicity programmes for promoting care for animals and responsible pet ownership. The relevant activities include producing announcements in the public interest to be broadcast on TV and radio; advertising on such platforms as public transport, magazines and websites; organising promotional events in shopping arcades; regularly conducting village and community campaigns; holding talks in schools; as well as conducting annual surveys on pet care. The Police also promotes the Animal Watch Scheme through such channels as the Police Magazine and the Junior Police Call, encouraging front-line units to make good use of platforms like the District Fight Crime Committee to solicit community support for prevention of cruelty to animals and raise public awareness.
On intelligence gathering, for the purpose of strengthening our intelligence network, the Police encourages private veterinarians, animal welfare concern groups and members of the public to report to law enforcement agencies any suspected activities of cruelty to animals. The Animal Watch Scheme is also supported by two professional veterinary associations, namely the Hong Kong Veterinary Association and China (Hong Kong) Veterinary Association. With a view to strengthening the intelligence network, they also encourage their members to report suspected acts of cruelty to animals or the suspected culprits.
On investigation, for the purpose of strengthening its efforts in the investigation of animal cruelty cases and help front-line officers better understand the multi-agency approach adopted under the Scheme, the Police organises seminars as and when appropriate and invites AFCD and SPCA staff to share their experience, so that front-line officers are kept abreast of the prevailing trends. In the various training courses run by the Police College, officers are briefed on offences involving cruelty to animals as well as the professional knowledge and skills required for investigating such cases. The Police will also introduce an e-learning software to provide police officers with an additional learning platform to ensure that cases of cruelty to animals are handled in a professional, comprehensive and consistent manner. AFCD and SPCA staff also provide expert advice to assist the Police's investigation into animal cruelty cases.
We can see from some cases that the above measures have started to yield positive results. For example, in June 2013, the Police and SPCA uncovered an animal cruelty case in Mong Kok with three men and women arrested. Recently in October, the Police received a few reports of animal corpses found in Yuen Long. A man was promptly arrested based on the information provided by a citizen who had taken the initiative to supply the leads. Investigation of the two cases is underway pending toxicological examination results. Given that the majority of cases handled by the Government were uncovered because members of the public had taken the initiative to make reports and provide information, the Scheme has proved effective in consolidating collaboration among various parties, strengthening co-operation between the Police and the community as well as enhancing public awareness of combating cruelty to animals.
(c) The number of prosecutions instituted under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance in the past three years was 11 in 2010, 15 in 2011 and 19 in 2012 respectively, with most of the offenders convicted. The number of convicted cases and the penalties imposed on the persons convicted are set out in Annex. A fine was the most common form of penalty imposed last year. Other forms of penalty included imprisonment and community service order. The Administration does not keep separate statistics on the number of animals involved in these cases.
That takes me to the suggestion that the Government should consider raising the penalties for offences relating to cruelty to animals to enhance the deterrent effect. At present, the maximum penalty under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance is a fine of $200,000 and imprisonment for three years. The level of penalty imposed by the court is generally higher than what used to be the case before the penalty provisions in the Ordinance were amended in 2006 (the maximum penalty before amendment was a fine of $5,000 and imprisonment for six months). The heaviest sentence handed down so far is imprisonment for eight months. We are of the view that there is no need to raise the penalty again for the time being. As I have stressed earlier, public education is the key to safeguarding and promoting animal welfare. We will continue to step up our efforts in publicity and education.
Ends/Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Issued at HKT 14:36
NNNN
