ПРАВОВЕ РЕГУЛЮВАННЯ СТАНОВИЩА ТВАРИН-КОМПАНЬЙОНІВ: МІЖНАРОДНИЙ ДОСВІД І УКРАЇНА

Abstract

The scientific article is devoted to the problem of changing the legal status of domestic animals in connection with the transition of humanity from the worldview concept of anthropocentrism to the concept of biocentrism. The characterization of international and regional legal acts in the field of protection of domestic animals (companion animals) was carried out. The importance of the formulation and subsequent implementation of the "concept of the five freedoms of animals" in the international and domestic legislation of the countries of the world is emphasized. The positive and negative experience of legal regulation of the position of domestic animals and the responsibility of their owners in the countries of the East and West is presented. It is noted that the attitude of the state to domestic animals is determined mainly by religion and political regime. The legislation of European countries notes the strengthening of society's responsible attitude towards companion animals, which implies a comprehensive approach to the problem of keeping animals. The latter includes educational work with animal owners, a tax on keeping animals, a clear prescription in legislation of the rights and responsibilities of pet owners, and very high fines, and sometimes even imprisonment, for neglecting pets. The responsibility of the municipal authorities for the aggressive behavior of homeless animals is also established. It is emphasized that the Ukrainian regulatory and legal framework is still lagging behind in the researched field, although since 2013 the process of implementation of European legislation has been underway. In a separate special law, animals are recognized as biological objects, that is, living beings, and the basic rights and obligations of pet owners and humane treatment of animals are recorded. The need to make changes to the civil legislation regarding the status of animals is noted. It is emphasized that low fines as a form of administrative responsibility do not contribute to increasing the responsibility of animal owners and officials.