MHA’s decision to not include more animals in Road Traffic Act disappoints rights groups
Joy Fang Today Online 16 Oct 14;
SINGAPORE — The police have rejected calls to penalise motorists who negligently run over any kind of animal, a move that has upset some groups here which have been lobbying for such changes.
Animal welfare activists who have been clamouring for more animals to be covered under the Road Traffic Act have expressed their disappointment, after the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) told this newspaper yesterday that it had decided against changing the Act which, among other things, requires motorists to stop and help certain animals if they knock them down.
At least two groups — the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (ACRES) — have indicated they will be appealing against the MHA’s decision.
The activists’ hopes for the Act to include more animals under its purview were raised in April last year, when the Ministry of National Development said it had accepted all 24 recommendations made by the Animal Welfare Legislation Review Committee, which included Members of Parliament, community leaders and industry representatives.
One of the recommendations was to align the definition of “animals” under the Road Traffic Act with that of the Animals and Birds Act, which states that an “animal” means any mammal (other than man) or fish, and includes any other living creature that is prescribed as an animal.
But the MHA said yesterday it had reviewed the Road Traffic Act and will not proceed with any amendments.
Its spokesman told TODAY: “In the recent review of the Road Traffic Act, the MHA decided against adopting the proposal of the Animal Welfare Legislation Review Committee after careful consideration. Our main concern was that it is not always safe for a motorist to stop his vehicle (e.g. when travelling along a busy expressway) after hitting an animal.”
Currently, if a motorist knocks down a dog, horse, ass, mule, sheep, pig, goat or cattle — which activists describe as animals with farm value — the Road Traffic Act states that failure to stop and help the animal could be a crime and the driver could face a S$3,000 fine or a jail term of up to a year. However, the Act is silent on other animals such as cats, monkeys, birds and rabbits.
The MHA’s decision comes after several Members of Parliament tabled a Bill on Oct 7 to amend the Animals and Birds Act to include harsher penalties for those convicted of acts of animal cruelty.
Several animal welfare groups told TODAY that they are disappointed with the MHA’s decision and hope that the authorities will reconsider.
ACRES founder Louis Ng said the society has been responding to “an increasing number of hit-and-run cases for a variety of animals, including macaques”.
“It would seem inconsistent that cruelty to a cat and other animals defined in the Animals and Birds Act is illegal, however, if you run over one, you do not need to stop to provide assistance. Both pieces of legislation should be in sync,” he said.
Action for Singapore Dogs (ASD) president Ricky Yeo suggested that even if the laws remain unchanged, it will be beneficial for the Government to educate the public on what to do, especially in the industrial areas, where the group has come across many hit-and-run cases involving animals.
The animal welfare groups agree that a balance has to be struck between safety and stopping for an injured animal that has been hit.
“But what is important is that the person who is responsible takes the responsibility by stopping later to check on the animal or rendering medical aid at the vet,” said Mr Yeo. He plans to work with the other animal welfare groups to engage the relevant authorities privately on this issue, to “see how receptive they are”.
The MHA spokesman said motorists who hit an animal on the road should stop and provide help only when it is safe to do so, adding that it encourages such drivers to contact the SPCA or Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore for assistance.
