Number of Animal Protection Act Violations Increased Over 10 Times in 10 Years
Low Punishment Levels Make It Hard to Raise Awareness
Patchwork Amendments Create Punishment Blind Spots
Animal Freedom Union Representative: "System and Awareness Defining Animals as Property Must Be Improved First"
On the 7th of last month, a vehicle was seen speeding down a road in Sangju, Gyeongbuk, with a dog hanging from it, sparking public outrage. Photo by Animal Freedom Coalition Facebook capture
[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Choyoung] On the 21st of last month, the animal rights organization 'CARE' exposed a video showing a high school student who left a cat standing on a third-floor windowsill and eventually pushed it off, sparking public outrage. Four days later, on the 25th in Sangju, Gyeongbuk, a video was released showing a driver speeding at 60-80 km/h with a dog tied to the back of their vehicle, resulting in the dog losing consciousness with all four paws crushed, causing controversy.
Although related laws have been revised several times whenever animal abuse incidents occur, harsh cases of pet abuse continue to arise, highlighting the urgent need for effective measures to prevent such acts. Experts emphasize that improvements in the system and perception that currently classify animals as property must precede proper legislative amendments.
According to media reports, the number of violations of the Animal Protection Act increased more than tenfold from 69 cases in 2010 to 914 cases in 2019. The number of suspects also rose significantly from 78 in 2010 to 973 in 2019. Despite multiple reinforcements of punishment provisions, voices remain that these are still insufficient to prevent animal abuse.
In particular, even when violations of the Animal Protection Act are confirmed, most offenders receive only fines or suspended sentences, making it difficult for abusers to develop a sense of caution.
According to data released last year by the Ministry of Justice and the courts, among 3,398 people prosecuted for violating the Animal Protection Act from 2016 to 2020, more than half?1,741 people (51.2%)?were not indicted. 1,081 people (31.8%) received summary order requests. Only 93 people (2.8%) were formally tried, and among them, only 2 people (0.1%) were detained and prosecuted.
Furthermore, in first-instance trials, out of 246 cases, 140 people (56.9%) received fines, and only 12 people were sentenced to imprisonment, accounting for just 4.9% of all first-instance cases.
This contrasts with countries like the United States, where animal abuse is treated as a crime that can lead to offenses against humans, resulting in heavier punishments.
According to a report titled "Correlation Study between Animal Abuse and Other Crimes" published by Northeastern University and the animal rescue organization MSPCA in the U.S., 70% of animal abusers committed at least one other crime, and most serial killers had a history of animal abuse. Consequently, the FBI has been accumulating animal abuse-related data in its National Incident-Based Reporting System since 2016.
A cat trapped in the window frame on the third floor. The next morning, the perpetrator pushed it off, injuring the cat so severely that its bones were exposed. Photo by Care, an animal rights organization, Facebook capture.
Given this situation, there is a growing call to establish provisions that comprehensively punish animal abuse acts, allowing exceptions only in special cases.
In the UK and Florida, USA, animal abuse is broadly defined and punished as "acts causing unnecessary pain to animals." In contrast, South Korea revises laws by adding specific abusive acts each time an incident occurs, creating legal blind spots.
The current law specifies punishment for acts such as "killing animals in public places or in front of other animals," "intentionally killing animals by withholding food or water," and "killing animals by cruel methods." Punishment is difficult when abusive acts do not match these provisions.
In February last year, the amended Animal Protection Act, along with its enforcement decree and rules, which focus on punishing animal abuse and strengthening the safety management and welfare of companion animals, came into effect on February 12. The amendment increased the penalty for causing an animal's death by cruel methods from "up to 2 years imprisonment or a fine up to 20 million KRW" to "up to 3 years imprisonment or a fine up to 30 million KRW."
However, despite the increased penalty levels, there remain loopholes where abusive acts not explicitly stated in the law are difficult to punish, making it challenging to fundamentally prevent animal abuse.
Experts stress that improvements in the system and perception that classify animals as property must come first for proper amendments related to punishment to be made.
Cho Heekyung, representative of Animal Freedom Coalition, stated, "Even when animal abuse occurs, perpetrators often go unpunished, leading to secondary harm or animals being neglected." She suggested, "Animals should be recognized as living beings, and in cases of cruel acts, ownership should be revoked or the abuser should be prohibited from keeping animals again."
Cho also pointed out, "The Animal Protection Act defines the national responsibility to protect animal life, ensure safety, and promote welfare, but the law is enacted in a rushed manner each time abuse cases arise." She emphasized, "Animal abuse must be recognized as a cruel act and lead to punishment."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
