Poliakov trial: does France really protect wild animals?

Does France really protect wild animals?

In light of the court decisions that are made in France in trial after trial in these types of cases, we have seen that the courts are more likely to sanction environmental offences. Is there an omerta (law of silence), or even a taboo, to allow wild animal keepers to mistreat? Because negligence is convicted when it comes to cats and dogs. We can see this happening in the case of Eliott the Lion at the Amar Circus, or in that of Jumbo, the hippopotamus who is kept by the circus that belongs to the violent Muller family. Each time that there is objective, conclusive evidence, the accused are ultimately only condemned for environmental infractions.

For the animals being kept by the Poliakovs, this absence of any sanction, which lived up to our expectations, happened despite the death of an animal which had maggots in its paws!

Ignorance of there being a culprit

The disregard for these animals – we have seen it already in inspections; officials don’t note down specific problems in the inspection reports – continues in the courtroom. This is extremely serious.

Animal protection laws which almost never apply

It is incomprehensible. It is as though the wild animals were willingly exploited, ours for the taking, and that therefore they did not suffer. As if we could do anything to them… and in fact, that’s what happens. The question can be asked: are these animals truly protected in our country? We are appealing the decision.

Translated from the French by Joely Justice