Assessment of the degree of social harmfulness of acts exhausting the elements set out in Article 35(1)-(2) of the Act of 21 August 1997 on the protection of animals. Comments on the background of rulings by common courts and the Supreme Court

Abstract

The views expressed in the public discourse, accusing the courts of excessive leniency towards the perpetrators of crimes against animals, as well as the problems that the courts often have in correctly determining the degree of social harmfulness of the assessed criminal acts, made it reasonable to devote this article to the title issue. After all, among the whole range of negative consequences that may result from a faulty estimation of the degree of social harmfulness, the most significant are those that directly affect the content of the judgment, resulting in, among other things, inadequately lenient treatment of the perpetrator to the gravity of the act. However, the purpose of this article was not only to verify the main research hypothesis, assuming that in cases of crimes against animals, the courts also make mistakes in the sphere in question, but also to determine what these failures consist of and what causes them, and, moreover, how they can be prevented. By the adopted research perspective, in-depth considerations (taking into account the achievements of science and jurisprudence in the area relevant to the subject of the study) were subjected not only to the decisions of common courts and the Supreme Court in cases involving the crimes mentioned above but also paid attention to the issue of social harmfulness of the title offences in the abstract, also making comparative legal analyses. As a result of the research, it was found that in cases of crimes against animals, the courts make mistakes in estimating the degree of social harmfulness of the act, which are not uniform. Among the most serious of these are the deficiencies that result from problems with the actual perception of the animal as a "being capable of feeling suffering" to which humans owe "respect, protection and care." In order to eliminate the defects above, it is necessary to take educational measures not only in the field of law but also in the basics of the sciences dealing with sensation consciousness and animal welfare.