When I became an RSPCA inspector in 1999, I was trained in the use and enforcement of
Protection of Animals Act. Where people had caused suffering to animals it was straightforward taking an investigation and ultimately taking individuals to court. One case I had was a man that had violently and repeatedly kicked his dog in the street, witnessed by several people working in a property company. He was arrested by the police, I interviewed him, I obtained witness statements, and got an expert opinion from a veterinary surgeon confirming that the dog had suffered. The man was convicted and banned from keeping animals for a period of time.

Although the legislation was 90 years old, in this type of situation it worked. The big gap was that I had to wait until an animal suffered, I could not legally intervene before that happened, even if I knew an animal would suffer. To someone passionate about improving animal welfare, this was a big frustration.

“The introduction of ‘duty of care’ has been such an improvement to animal welfare. No longer do we have to leave animals in a filthy environment, just because they are not physically suffering. Like humans, animals can suffer mental anguish and an unsuitable environment may not cause immediate physical harm, but it is detrimental to an animal’s wellbeing.”

– Dermot Murphy, RSPCA Inspectorate Commissioner

If duty of care were to come into effect, we would hope that authorised officers could issue an Improvement Notice to let owners or keepers know that they are at risk of committing an offence and extend an opportunity to rectify the situation, stating what needs to be corrected and a date to comply. Failure to comply with the Improvement Notice may lead to prosecution.

In the UK, this has been successful, with recent data showing 98% compliance. Very few of these situations need to be taken to court as a result, but animal welfare is improved.

Presently in Hong Kong, if the animal does not show any signs of suffering or physical injuries, it may be difficult for the law enforcement agencies to intervene or remove an animal. With the proposed amendment to the legislation to include a “duty for care”, an authorised officer would be able to encourage owners to improve the care of the animals and more easily rescue and remove an animal from a situation where suffering has occurred or, importantly, may result if the animal is left in situ.

It was also recommended that a Disqualification Order be introduced to ban persons convicted of animal cruelty from owning animals. These updates would help us to better safeguard animal welfare throughout the city.