THE BAN ON FOREIGN BREEDS DOGS

by Kiran Kulkarni, Advocate
Dog lovers across India are in dilemma over the recent news about the ban on the import and breeding of 23 dog breeds in India which has created lots of confusion among dog lovers and breeders. Each of them has their interpretations and explanations. The news has created a lot of misconceptions. While the news item is circulated on social media, even the letter issued by the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India is being circulated. For a layman, it has created confusion since they believe it to be a law.

The government has classified breeds such as the Rottweiler, Pitbull, Mastiffs, and many more as dangerous, blaming them for attacks and claiming that the ban is in a move towards curbing the rising number of dog attacks reported in the country. The decision to impose a ban on the import, sale, and breeding of 23 ferocious dog breeds considering them to be a threat to human life was taken by the Centre following a report by a joint panel of experts and animal welfare bodies who had submitted such report in response to an order of the Delhi High Court. The High Court had directed the union government to decide the matter after consulting all stakeholders within three months. However after the report was tendered, the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying immediately addressed a letter to the chief secretaries of states and Union territories to ensure the imposition of the ban. The letter mentions that the import of such dog breeds is recommended by the expert committee formed under the chairmanship of the commissioner of Animal Husbandry.

The moot question however remains is, whether it is a recommendation, a rule, or a directive. Can a govt impose a ban only based on a letter issued by the department acting on the recommendation of experts? Can the circulation of a letter without publication of notification or circular in the official gazette be accepted as an instrument having the force of law. Natural justice requires that before a law becomes operative it must be promulgated or published. It must be broadcast in some recognizable way so that all men may know what it is; In the absence therefore of any law, rule, regulation, or custom, a law cannot come into being in this way. Promulgation or publication of some reasonable sort is essential. Since the letter is issued by the Department of Animal Husbandry, a proper publication by way of official gazette is mandatory. So legally there cannot be any ban based on such a letter issued by the department in the absence of an official gazette. Moreover, such letter was filed in response to the appeals that the Animal Husbandry and Dairying Department received from not-for-profit organizations and activists to ban certain ferocious breeds.

The recommendation has thrown open a huge debate on importing dogs, especially exotic breeds, versus adopting Indie breeds. The debate also connects the need for proper breeding rules taking into consideration the ground realities rather than having a hypothetical approach. Further, the govt has failed to educate pet parents on the need for training for the dogs which would save many problems of dog bites and attacks. The recently passed Prevention of cruelty to Animals ( Dog Breeding and marketing ) rules 2017 are challenged in various high courts and have thus become unenforceable and a dud letter.

Most animal activists support the recommendation of the govt as they believe that many foreign breeds are unsuitable to Indian climate and the ban will stop the suffering in the Indian climatic conditions. A lot of exotic breeds can’t deal with the hot and humid climate of India. Further, these breeds require special nutrition, which many dog parents don’t provide considering the high maintenance costs involved but are imported purely for breeding. As such the quality of life of these dogs are affected reducing their life span. The ban will encourage people to go for indigenous breeds which our Hon’ble Prime Minister had urged in his Mann ki Baat. Dog activists bat for adopting inide dogs which are resilient to the Indian environment and have stronger immune systems and are low on maintenance.

Dogs lovers however don’t agree that the 23 breeds are aggressive and labelling them as dangerous is flawed. At the same sometime it cannot be denied that many power breeds are used for illegal dog fights, especially in states like Punjab. Dog breeding is a thriving industry and banning 23 breeds will leave thousands of people across India jobless. The proper way out would be to regulate breeding which the govt has failed miserably. The government must ensure that every breeder is registered with the local government bodies and that the breeders follow the prescribed rules. While these rules are already in place, many unjustified and impracticable rules have attracted the attention of many courts, which have stayed the implementation of such rules.

The fundamental problem with breeds

Are these breeds dangerous? The Internet suggests that in many countries, the Labrador leads in most dog bites. The news however in India is highlighted only when aggressive breeds are involved. Attacks by other breeds are never reported as they are not fatal. So is it the pet that is responsible or the pet owner? What are the factors leading to attacks? Out of the 23 breeds, most of them are loyal, intelligent and affectionate and some are great guard dogs. So the underlying problem is the proper training and socialization. If the 23 breeds were so dangerous, would other countries or any country would have considered keeping them? In India, the majority so called animal lovers and pet owners of such breeds concentrate more on breeding, affecting the quality of life of the dogs. India needs to learn dog culture from the European countries and adopt their ways of training and socialization.  

Most pet owners ignore this vital aspect of training and socialization which are vital for the dogs upbringing. Being responsible owners, training, and socializing dogs is what matters the most. Educating the pet owners and enforcing rules works better. Solving individual problems is better than blaming the entire society. Dogs have good qualities and make great companions irrespective of the breeds, if nurtured properly. Encouraging and educating pet owners will make everyone safer and vindicate the dogs for dog-related problems. With proper training many issues of dogs can be addressed. The training of most dogs owners is limited to shake hands, sit, run and bring a ball. However many never teach proper commands which shape the dog to be obedient.

Without considering all these aspects, the issuance of letter by the Department of Animal Husbandry to secretaries of states informing them of banning certain breeds won’t solve dog attacks or dog bites and dog-related problems. The unsettled issue lies somewhere else which the govt needs to address seriously without jumping to immature conclusions.

Kiran Kulkarni, Advocate

The writer is an Advocate and has represented the People for Animals (PFA) and the Animal Welfare Board of India. The author has also represented the Belgaum Canine Association