Bans on circus animals

Apr 23, 2026 - 22:53
0 0
Bans on circus animals

European Union

← Previous revision Revision as of 17:22, 23 April 2026
Line 79: Line 79:
As of 2026, the use of animals in circuses has been partially or entirely banned in all [[member states of the European Union]]. Most restrictions involve wild animals or wilde mammals, but leave open any other species.
As of 2026, the use of animals in circuses has been partially or entirely banned in all [[member states of the European Union]]. Most restrictions involve wild animals or wilde mammals, but leave open any other species.


When [[Austria]] adopted a nationalwide total ban on the keeping of wild animals in circuses, effective 1 January 2005,{{efn|Paragraph 27 of the Austrian Animal Protection Act{{Cite web |title=Decision of the European Ombudsman closing his inquiry into complaint 3307/2006/(PB)JMA against the European Commission |last=Ombudsman |first=European |work=European Ombudsman |date=15 March 2010 |access-date=23 April 2026 |url= https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/decision/en/4653#_ftnref1}} [''Tierschutzgesetz'']: "Species of wild animals are not allowed to be kept in circuses, variety show institutions and similar facilities. (...)".{{Cite web |title=Bundesgesetz über den Schutz der Tiere (Tierschutzgesetz – TSchG). Federal Act on the Protection of Animals (Animal Protection Act – TSchG) |author= |work=ris.bka.gv.at |date=2004 |access-date=2026-04-23 |url= https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/Erv/ERV_2004_1_118/ERV_2004_1_118.pdf}}}} a circus association lodged a complaint at the [[European Commission]], citing the "[[Freedom of Establishment and Freedom to Provide Services in the European Union|free movement of services]]". After seeking clarification with the Austrian authorities, the Commission decided not to launch an infraction procedure against Austria. This prompted the circus association to lodge a complaint at the [[European Ombudsman]], who reasoned that the Commission had inadequately motivated its decision, as the proportionality of Austria's measure in restricting the free movement of services was not tested. By July 2007, [[Croatia]] had also adopted nationalwide bans on certain circus animals, and the national government of the [[Netherlands]] was considering it after the Dutch municipality of [[Winschoten]] lost a court case over its competence to locally ban non-domesticated animals from circuses.{{Cite news |title=Olifant in circus heeft weinig leefgenot |trans-title=An elephant in a circus has little joy in life |last=van Keken |first=Kim |work=[[de Volkskrant]] |date=27 July 2009 |access-date=23 April 2026 |url= https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/olifant-in-circus-heeft-weinig-leefgenot~be389b9c/ |language=nl}} Dutch Agriculture Minister [[Gerda Verburg]] rejected the idea of a national ban (following Austria and Croatia's example), but offered to explore the option of an EU-wide ban instead. In a letter dated 18 September 2009 to the European Ombudsman, the European Commission clarified its position by saying Austria could restrict the free movement of services, because the protection of animal welfare could constitute an "overriding reason of general interest" (an acceptable exception to Article 56 [[TFEU]] established by CFEU case law). For reasons having to do with the complicated historical-cultural development of views on animal welfare across various societies, the Commission found that it was within the purview of the member states to decide how animal welfare should be best protected, and that the Commission was not required to pass judgement on the proportionality of measures taken by member states in this regard. In November 2007, Verburg responded by repeating her earlier objections to a national ban in the Netherlands.{{Cite web | url=https://edepot.wur.nl/15162 |title=23 november 2009 - Ministerie van LNV - Brief Europese Commissie over bevoegdheid lidstaten inzake het verbieden van wilde dieren in circussen |trans-title=23 November 2009 – Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality – Letter from the European Commission regarding Member States’ competence to ban wild animals in circuses |access-date=23 April 2026}}
When [[Austria]] adopted a nationalwide total ban on the keeping of wild animals in circuses, effective 1 January 2005,{{efn|Paragraph 27 of the Austrian Animal Protection Act{{Cite web |title=Decision of the European Ombudsman closing his inquiry into complaint 3307/2006/(PB)JMA against the European Commission |last=Ombudsman |first=European |work=European Ombudsman |date=15 March 2010 |access-date=23 April 2026 |url= https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/decision/en/4653#_ftnref1}} [''Tierschutzgesetz'']: "Species of wild animals are not allowed to be kept in circuses, variety show institutions and similar facilities. (...)".{{Cite web |title=Bundesgesetz über den Schutz der Tiere (Tierschutzgesetz – TSchG). Federal Act on the Protection of Animals (Animal Protection Act – TSchG) |author= |work=ris.bka.gv.at |date=2004 |access-date=23 April 2026 |url= https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/Erv/ERV_2004_1_118/ERV_2004_1_118.pdf}}}} a circus association lodged a complaint at the [[European Commission]], citing the "[[Freedom of Establishment and Freedom to Provide Services in the European Union|free movement of services]]". After seeking clarification with the Austrian authorities, the Commission decided not to launch an infraction procedure against Austria. This prompted the circus association to lodge a complaint at the [[European Ombudsman]], who reasoned that the Commission had inadequately motivated its decision, as the proportionality of Austria's measure in restricting the free movement of services was not tested. By July 2007, [[Croatia]] had also adopted nationalwide bans on certain circus animals, and the national government of the [[Netherlands]] was considering it after the Dutch municipality of [[Winschoten]] lost a court case over its competence to locally ban non-domesticated animals from circuses.{{Cite news |title=Olifant in circus heeft weinig leefgenot |trans-title=An elephant in a circus has little joy in life |last=van Keken |first=Kim |work=[[de Volkskrant]] |date=27 July 2009 |access-date=23 April 2026 |url= https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/olifant-in-circus-heeft-weinig-leefgenot~be389b9c/ |language=nl}} Dutch Agriculture Minister [[Gerda Verburg]] rejected the idea of a national ban (following Austria and Croatia's example), but offered to explore the option of an EU-wide ban instead. In a letter dated 18 September 2009 to the European Ombudsman, the European Commission clarified its position by saying Austria could restrict the free movement of services, because the protection of animal welfare could constitute an "overriding reason of general interest" (an acceptable exception to Article 56 [[TFEU]] established by CFEU case law). For reasons having to do with the complicated historical-cultural development of views on animal welfare across various societies, the Commission found that it was within the purview of the member states to decide how animal welfare should be best protected, and that the Commission was not required to pass judgement on the proportionality of measures taken by member states in this regard. In November 2007, Verburg responded by repeating her earlier objections to a national ban in the Netherlands.{{Cite web | url=https://edepot.wur.nl/15162 |title=23 november 2009 - Ministerie van LNV - Brief Europese Commissie over bevoegdheid lidstaten inzake het verbieden van wilde dieren in circussen |trans-title=23 November 2009 – Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality – Letter from the European Commission regarding Member States’ competence to ban wild animals in circuses |access-date=23 April 2026}}


=== Greece ===
=== Greece ===
Read More