PRESS RELEASE OF THE VETERINARY
PROFESSIONAL UNION AND GAIA
Slaughter without stunning:
17 associations call for its ban in an open letter to the Brussels government and parliament
Friday 9 August 2019 - In Wallonia and Flanders, the legal prohibition of slaughter without stunning has been extended to ritual slaughter of animals.
Only the Brussels-Capital Region continues to authorize the slaughter of animals without stunning.
In an open letter, 17 associations - including the Professional Veterinary Union and GAIA - are asking the new government and the parliament of Brussels to prohibit, without exception, slaughter without stunning in the Brussels Region.
"Mandatory stunning is the only way to save animals from severe and prolonged suffering and distress, both unnecessary and technically unavoidable. It is essential that elected officials in Brussels become aware of it and prove the seriousness they give to animal welfare ", argues Michel Vandenbosch, the president of GAIA.
The subject of slaughter without stunning interfered, despite himself, in the election campaign of April-May.
If the Brussels-Capital Region was the first to have a new executive, it did not make the slightest mention of slaughter without stunning in the agreement of the new Brussels government.
In Flanders, however, the ban on slaughter without stunning came into effect on 1 January 2019.
In Wallonia, the entry into force of the law is planned for 1 September 2019.
Will this "Brussels exception" eventually yield with the new government?
This is what GAIA wants, but also the Union Professionnelle Veterinaire (UPV) and 15 other approved animal shelters and animal welfare companies.
This Saturday, August 10, on the eve of Eid el-Kebir (Feast of Sacrifice), 17 associations send an open letter to elected officials and the Brussels government.
A letter which repeats, point by point, 10 good reasons not to authorize slaughter without stunning in the Brussels-Capital Region.
Associations point out that compulsory stunning is the only way to save animals from suffering and distress that is as unnecessary as it is avoidable.
Why we claim mandatory stunning
In Brussels, slaughter without stunning is not only practiced one day a year, but daily at the Anderlecht abattoir.
According to the FASFC, no less than 87% of calves, 96% of sheep and 31% of cattle are slaughtered without stunning in Brussels. Slaughtering animals without stunning, however, exposes them to severe and prolonged suffering.
"It is scientifically proven that slaughter without stunning exposes animals to suffering that can last 2 minutes for sheep and up to 6 minutes for cattle. In some cases, the animal dies up to 14 minutes, "insists Michel Vandenbosch, president of GAIA.
"Slaughter without prior stunning increases the duration of unconsciousness. During this period of consciousness, the animal may be exposed to unnecessary pain and suffering due to the exposure of injured organs, the possible aspiration of blood and ruminal contents, in the case of ruminants, the possible suffering due to asphyxia after section of the phrenic nerve and vagus nerve, "says Dr. Alain Schonbrodt, Secretary of the Veterinary Professional Union (UPV).
Brussels can no longer be an exception
Wallonia and Flanders have chosen a more dignified method: electronarcosis (reversible).
It must also be noted that all the Belgian and European veterinary associations are unambiguous on this subject: slaughter without stunning is unacceptable in terms of suffering for the animal.
"The UPV represents Belgium to the European Veterinary Federation," says Dr. Alain Schonbrodt. This federation, which brings together 310,000 European veterinarians, voted unanimously on a motion stressing in particular that from the point of view of animal welfare, and with regard to the respect due to the animal as a sentient being, the practice of slaughter without prior stunning is unacceptable. "
The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg is also unequivocal: in a judgment delivered on 26/2/2019, it recognizes that animals suffer more when they are killed in full consciousness, and that it is necessary to stun in order to minimize their suffering.
A solemn appeal
"Stunning animals before slaughtering is not a claim motivated by anti-religious or xenophobic feelings. It does not mean the ban on ritual slaughter itself, insists Michel Vandenbosch. The challenge, however, is ethical: it is about imposing the most appropriate stunning method so that sensitive animals suffer as little as possible."
At the heart of Europe, the Brussels Region is committed to many areas.
She now has a moral duty: to save as much as possible from the animals any suffering and distress at the time of slaughter.
"It is essential that the Brussels elected officials become aware of this need and prove the seriousness they give to animal welfare," pleads Michel Vandenbosch.
And to insist: "The Brussels Animal Welfare Act expressly states that animals are sentient beings, who have their own interests and dignity, and that they enjoy special protection. So, just as much apply it in the facts! "
|