European Court of Human Rights rules on prohibition of animal slaughter without stunning
In a recent ruling on February 13, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) endorsed the prohibition of slaughtering animals without stunning prior to halal and kosher rituals in the regions of Flanders and Wallonia in Belgium. This decision has sparked controversy as it goes against European regulations that allow stunning exceptions for religious reasons.
The practice of animal sacrifice for meat production is a complex process that involves several phases, including inspection, stunning, slaughter, post-mortem controls, and airing. Stunning, which involves rendering the animal unconscious before bleeding, is considered a humane practice to reduce suffering prior to slaughter.
The conflict arises from the requirement of reversible stunning even in cases of religious rites, a mandate introduced by Flanders and Wallonia in 2017 and 2018 to ensure animal welfare. This move has been questioned by Jewish and Muslim communities, citing violations of their religious freedom.
To resolve this conflict, three courts, including the Constitutional Court of Belgium, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), and the European Court of Human Rights, have ruled that regulations mandating stunning prior to slaughter do not violate religious freedom if it aims to ensure animal welfare.
The recent ruling by the ECtHR takes into account the evolving concept of public morality and ethical values surrounding animal welfare in modern society. The decision sets a precedent for similar regulations across the European Union and the Council of Europe.
These resolutions have implications for other countries in the EU and have already been implemented in states like Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark. The balancing act between religious freedom and animal welfare continues to be a topic of debate, with the focus shifting towards ensuring the well-being of animals in slaughter practices.