Abstract
Previous research has identified a number of issues arising at all stages of the animal law enforcement process. These issues contribute to an enforcement gap between the written law, as it relates to the penalties laid out in statutes, and the reality of the animal law justice system. This paper identifies and investigates the contributors to this gap. The identified factors discussed are (1) the role of the public in reporting animal cruelty, (2) the ambiguity of the language used in animal welfare legislation, (3) the nature of enforcement authorities, and (4) the role of the courts. Thus, the causes of the enforcement gap are multifactorial, derived from all stages of the enforcement process. Further research on the enforcement model and public education, in addition to debate on legislative reforms, will be needed to address this gap.
Highlights
Animal cruelty is a multiplex issue that affects animals globally [1]
Researchers have started to question the role and efficacy of the law in the regulation and promotion of animal welfare [2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. These authors have identified several weaknesses in the animal protection legal process in the Australian context, from the ambiguity of the language used in legislation [7] and the unorthodox use of non-government organizations (NGO) for enforcement of this branch of criminal law [7,9,12], to the severity of the penalties imposed for offences [8,10]
Given the legality of duck hunting in Victoria, RSPCA Victoria were campaigning against lawful activity. This same issue has been noted in campaigns on dairy cows, greyhound racing, layer hens, live exports, meat chickens, pig farming and whips in horse races [95], which are all legal activities under Victorian law [92], and common campaigns run by RSPCAs across Australia
Summary
Simple Summary: Animal cruelty or neglect is an emotive social issue. Animal welfare legislation is the primary tool for defining, penalizing and hopefully deterring animal cruelty. A number of issues arising at all stages of the animal law enforcement process have been previously identified. These issues contribute to a discrepancy between the written law and the realities of the animal law enforcement process: the ‘enforcement gap’. It is argued that the ‘gap’ is caused by numerous factors derived from all stages of the enforcement process: (1) reporting acts of animal cruelty, (2) ambiguity and shortcomings derived from the language used in animal welfare legislation (3) the nature of enforcement authorities, and (4). In order to reduce the enforcement gap and bring the expectations closer to reality, further research is needed
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
