May I draw your attention to incidents of cruelty committed against animals that happened in Tsing Yi - Hong Kong and the tolerance of which that was shown by the inaction and complacency shown by various government departments.

1 The Incident

On 18th Nov, 2003 in the Tai Wong Ha Villa neighbourhood in Tsing Yi, two dogs suffered severely after having tasted poisoned beef mixed with rat bait; one of them died soon after having suffered a violent convulsion.

A woman from the neighbourhood has later admitted to have laid the poisoned meat on the public pavement without warning because some dogs have soiled the area outside her flat. In other words, the poisoned beef was prepared intentionally by the woman for the passer-by dogs to consume.

This incident was brought to the police’s attention immediately. However, to the disappointment of the owners of the affected animals, the police decided that there was insufficient evidence to prove any criminal offence such as animal cruelty soon after a discussion held in the woman’s home with her family members & an independent candidate of regional councilor.

2 Legislation on Cruelty against Animals

Please consider the current ordinance Chapter 169 PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ORDINANCE of Hong Kong SAR in which it is held that “any person who….causes any unnecessary suffering to any animal.” shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine of $5000 and to imprisonment for 6 months. Full text of the ordinance can be found in the following government website http://www.justice.gov.hk

3 The Bowen Serial Dog Killer Case

Similar incidents of dog killing have been reported to the police, the most prolific being the Bowen Road serial dog killing cases. A significant number of cases have also been reported to the police, mainly within the Western District. In these cases, the method of disposing poison is almost identical to the Tsing Yi incident. Poison is mixed with cooked meat and is scattered on public pavements. The suspect of the Bowen case is yet to be identified despite of the various campaigns and investigations that have been launched by the police in the Western and Happy Valley district.

4 Police response to the Tsing-Yi incident

We believe that there is discrepancy between the ways in which police in the Tsing-Yi district and the Western and Happy Valley district have treated the malicious act of poisoning innocent animal through the use of cooked meat as bait.

The police in the Tsing-Yi district has dismissed the possibility of pressing criminal charges, such as cruelty against animal, against the offender, despite the presence of witnesses to whom the offender has admitted her intention of poisoning dogs that walk along the public pavement outside of her flat.

In contrast, police from the Happy Valley district has taken considerable actions such as launching a series of investigation and campaign aiming to stop and to identify the offender. Special warning signs are placed in the affected areas to draw the attention of citizens to the danger of animals being baited by poisoned meat.

5 Summary of responses from the media, public bodies, and government departments

Media

On 20-11-2003 Oriental Daily reported the case
On 24-11-2003 South China Morning Post reported the case
On 02-01-2004 Oriental Daily reported a follow up story on the case

Public Bodies

Legislative Counselor Mr. Leung Yiu Chung's office has looked into the case and interceded on behalf of the owners of the affected dogs. On the 21st Nov, 2003, representative of Legislator Leung’s office sent letters to the Department of Justice, the Police, the Food & Environment Hygiene Department and the SPCA.

Responses of Government departments

On the 26th Nov, 2003 the Food & Environmental Hygiene Department replied in a letter saying the case is now under investigation. No conclusion is reached till present date.

On the 11th Dec, 2003 the Department of Justice replied in a letter expressing the department is not responsible for personal injury cases.

On 2nd of January 2004, the Oriental Daily newspaper published the case to draw attention of the public. Besides expressing un-satisfaction of the police inaction once again by the victims, the reporter also followed up the case with respective government bodies. Representative from the Police Department had expressed and informed neighbor of the Tai Wong Ha Villa of placing poisoned baits in public area with an intention of poisoning dogs should not lead to civil offence where inputs from the Food & Environmental Hygiene Department as well as SPCA were drawn. It was told by the Agriculture, Fisheries & Conservation Department that the Pesticides Ordinance indeed did not restrain the disposal of pesticides. In view of the increasing concerns in the matter, only licensed persons can place pesticides in public area in the future. Once stressed by the SPCA, any offence to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance, the maximum penalty could be HKD 5,000 and an imprisonment of six months.

A number of questions have been raised to the police but the results have been disappointing. It is evident that police officers are unable to relate the intentional killing of domesticated animals by using poisoned bait i.e. cooked beef, to relevant legislation such as the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance as mentioned above. A complaint letter was sent to the Independent Police Complaints Council (IPCC) on 21-11-2003 to which a reply is given saying the case is now under investigation. No conclusion is reached till present date.

Conclusion