|
German
Dog Laws Update
European Commission slaps down Germany’s
breed plans
BRITISH
OWNERS of Staffordshire Bull Terriers are quietly optimistic
that plans by the German Federal Government to implement their
ban on four Bull breeds - including Staffordshire Bull Terriers
- throughout all EU member states have been finally slapped
down by the European Commission.
MEP Paul Tyler, who has fought against the introduction of such
breed specific legislation, recently received a very positive
letter from EU Commissioner David Byrne which indicates, quite
clearly, that all attempts by the German Federal Government
to implement such legislation have been dismissed at all levels
of the EC.
On January 28th 2002, Mr Byrne wrote:- “The Federal Authorities
in Germany adopted legislation on dangerous dogs, banning certain
breeds, in the interests of public safety. While one may question
whether it is the correct policy to focus on individual breeds,
we have to be sensitive to their insistence that it is necessary
to protect public safety especially in the tragic circumstances
which underlie the legislation. Nonetheless, the measure has
led to allegations of discrimination against certain breeds,
particularly the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.
This breed is very popular in the United Kingdom where it is
not associated with aggressiveness. The German policy has also
been attacked as focusing on breeds of dog rather than on the
behaviour of individual animals and/or their owners when there
are good grounds to suggest that the latter are the more important
factors.
“The Commission has received a lot of complaints and correspondence
in the matter and my services and cabinet have met animal welfare
groups and canine associations, including the RKC, to discuss
these concerns. However, it is very difficult to see a Community
dimension to the issue which would allow me to play a constructive
role. First and foremost, from the public health perspective,
it is viewed in the Member States as a subsidiary issue which
does not require any Community involvement. In this respect,
I have not received an approach from any Member State on the
need for Community legislation in this field. Moreover, it is
not clear what legal case under the Treaty could be used to
promote public health legislation on the issue of dangerous
dogs. In the circumstances I have decided that priority should
be given in my services to other animal welfare issues where
there is a clear-cut case for Community action.
“It may also interest you to know that Germany did raise
the issue of Community measures on dangerous dogs in the Justice
and Home Affairs Council [In Autumn 2000]. However, I understand
that there was no support for such measures and the issue has
not been pursued further in that Council. I understand that
efforts to have the matter pursued in other areas of Community
competence, for example freedom of movement and agriculture,
have also not met with much success for reasons similar to what
I have outlined above.
“Clearly, the situation will be kept under review but for
the moment the situation in relation to public health is as
outlined above. If there is any change in the situation I will
ensure that you are informed. In the meantime, your constituents
are welcome to maintain their contacts with the Commission services.”
David Levy, KC Representative of the UK’s Staffordshire
Bull Terrier Breed Council commented: “I have received
a copy of this letter from Paul Tyler MEP that seems to make
clear that we have finally defeated Germany’s plan to extend
its misdirected anti-dog legislation to the rest of Europe.
This should perhaps be read in conjunction with the letters
received by campaigners across Europe from the office of The
Secretary General of the European Commission now that the issue
has been formally registered as the first step in the official
complaint process within Europe.
“Unfortunately it appears that a few other countries around
the world have been persuaded to take up similar unwarranted
action. It can only be hoped that when they learn of the European
Commission view, that they will be persuaded to consider the
matter in a more balanced way and restore proper and fair rights
to their citizens.
“In the meantime, despite the necessity for the European
Commission to avoid censuring the German Government, several
of David Byrne’s comments can only be seen as being highly
critical of the German stance and supportive of all the people
who have raised objections.
“... particularly the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. This
breed is very popular in the United Kingdom where it is not
associated with aggressiveness.”
Over the past few years there has been some criticism that SBT
owners have been too insular in their objections to the German
legislation but this statement should be read in the context
of the SBT Breed Council’s long-standing policy towards
Breed Specific Legislation.
Mr Byrne has clearly been persuaded to the view that the SBT
demonstrates the irrationality of Germany’s action towards
all dogs.
“The German policy has also been attacked as focusing on
breeds of dog rather than on the behaviour of individual animals
and/or their owners when there are good grounds to suggest that
the latter are the more important factors”.
Again, Mr Byrne has clearly understood the need for any government
to base its legislation on facts and science rather than gut
reaction and the vagaries of the popular press. Surely the German
authorities must now recognise that a full and open judicial
review is essential before they can claim any credibility for
their actions to date.
“What should be more worrying to German citizens is Mr
Byrne’s point that other issues “are the more important
factors” in dog attacks. This is precisely the point that
all the UK’s animal organisations from the Kennel Club,
RSPCA, BVA, NCDL, etc. have been trying to make for many years,
yet even the British press has failed to understand this point.
So long as the national law of any country targets breeds rather
than the real causes and indicators of danger then attacks will
continue and the dog generally will be castigated.”
Mr Levy goes onto point out that misinformation via the press
is used in the UK as well as in Germany on the subject of ‘dangerous’
dogs:
“It is a matter of fact that the few serious dog attacks
in the UK over the past 2 to 3 years have NOT involved the breeds
that are normally blamed, yet lesser incidents involving Staffords,
Rottweilers and Dobermanns continue to make front page news
in local newspapers. It can be no coincidence that cases continue
to come to court under section 3 of the 1991 Dangerous Dogs
Act whilst the public continues to be misinformed by the emphasis
remaining on breeds.
“The Kennel Club chairs the DLAG meetings that evolved
from the DDA Reform Group specifically to commence a review
of all dog related law in the UK. Until governments across Europe
and perhaps the wider world begin a process of consultation
with the animal welfare organisations people will continue to
be injured as a direct result of the actions of criminal or
improperly educated owners.”
|
