INTERVIEW: Is trying to ban Halal slaughtering a concern for Human Rights (original) (raw)

2022, The European Times

By Alessandro Amicarelli. Freedom of religion and belief protects the right of believers to live their lives in accordance with their beliefs, within limits, and this also includes some practices relating to social and food traditions, this being the case for instance of halal and kosher preparations. There have been cases of proposals aimed at banning halal and kosher procedures arguing on the rights of animals that according to detractors of these traditions are exposed to excessive cruelty. Interview to Vasco Fronzoni, Associate Professor at the Università telematica Pegaso in Italy, is a specialist in Shari’a Law and Islamic Markets, and he is also Lead Auditor of Quality management Systems, specialized for the Halal sector at the Halal Research Council of Lahore. English INTERVIEW: Is trying to ban Halal slaughtering a concern for Human ... https://www.europeantimes.news/2022/11/interview-is-trying-to-ban-hal...

The growth of halal meat markets in Europe: An exploration of the supply side theory of religion

Over the last 15 years dedicated markets for halal meat have emerged in a number of European countries. While ethnic stores still constitute the major retail outlet for halal meat in most countries, ‘halal’ labelled meat and meat products are increasingly available in supermarkets and fast food restaurants. Market expansion has also facilitated the rise of new certification bodies, each with their own marketing strategies and interpretations of what constitutes authentic ‘halal’, who question the reliability of certification policies that allow the practice of stunning before slaughter.This paper offers a comparative analysis of these market trends and developments across four European countries. Based on research carried out during the EU funded Dialrel project, it draws attention to the ways in which EU legislation and WTO trade guidelines hinder attempts to standardize halal certification by giving equal weight to pre-stun and non-stun halal slaughter practices emanating from different regional schools of thought within Sunni Islam. Whilst recognising the impact of global politics on the identity claims of Muslim groups across Europe, the paper draws on Einstein's work on the ‘supply side’ theory of religion to demonstrate how the diverse halal practices evident in the marketing strategies of commercial and religious actors are now driving the rapid growth and development of halal meat markets across Europe.

A Review of Legal Regulation of Religious Slaughter in Australia: Failure to Regulate or a Regulatory Fail?

Animals

While religious slaughter is not a new practice in Australia, it has recently attracted public concern regarding questions of animal welfare following unfavourable media coverage. However, the details of religious slaughter practices, including related animal welfare provisions, appear to be poorly understood by the Australian public, and no existing literature concisely synthesises current regulations, practices, and issues. This paper addresses this gap by examining the processes associated with various types of religious slaughter and associated animal welfare issues, by reviewing the relevant legislation and examining public views, while highlighting areas for further research, particularly in Australia. The paper finds shortcomings in relation to transparency and understanding of current practices and regulation and suggests a need for more clear and consistent legislative provisions, as well as increased independence from industry in the setting of the standards, enforcement a...

KILL ME WITH KINDNESS: RECONSIDERING ANIMAL SLAUGHTER DURING EID UL-AZHA: A MODESTLY RADICAL PROPOSAL

Does the annual, ritualized, live, mass slaughter of livestock animals practiced by observant Muslims worldwide during Eid ul-Adha (which commemorates the Abrahamic sacrifice and is a required obligation for financially able pilgrims during Hajj) respect the sanctity of life and afford a “good death” to the slaughtered animals in any meaningful way? Does it matter for an ethically conscious believing Muslim that the lives of these animals be extinguished by our hands in the most humane way possible? These are the broad questions I explore in my paper. In particular, I describe how, except in certain narrow circumstances, this ritual, as often practiced now, is open to the following ethical critiques:  The ritual treats animals unethically according to non-Islamic ethical standards.  The ritual treats animals unethically according to Islamic teachings about the treatment of animals.  The ritual doesn’t function ethically as an individual experience that brings one closer to God by promoting the sanctity and preciousness of life (yes, ironically, by giving the animals in question a swift, clean death with minimal pain and suffering), i.e., as it’s supposed to function. Instead, the ritual involves turning a blind eye to the prolonged suffering inflicted upon the animals who are the objects of sacrifice.  The ritual doesn’t function socially or practically as it was intended to function, e.g., it’s an inefficient way to help the poor.  There are other ways in which participants are negatively impacted by the ritual e.g., some people are too close to the slaughter and therefore desensitized, and others who are too far from the slaughter are also desensitized in a different way. Thus, Muslims and our allies who are troubled by these critiques need to forge alliances whether to advocate for reforms to the practice, or to reimagine the practice altogether.

Equality among Animals and Religious Slaughter (Historical Social Research)

2015

Current laws on the treatment of animals in all liberal countries demand that animals be stunned before being slaughtered in order to prevent their suffering. This is derived from a widely-shared concern for animal welfare. However, in many Western countries, exemptions from this legal requirement have been granted to Jewish and Muslim communities so that they can continue to perform ritual slaughter. Hence, there seems to be a clash between the right to religious freedom and the duty to minimize animal suffering during slaughter. In this paper, I want to propose a solution to this seemingly irreconcilable clash. To understand whether these two principles are really incompatible, we need to establish exactly what they demand of us. I argue that there is no convincing reason to take the suffering involved in the killing of animals more seriously than the suffering experienced by animals during their lives (on farms). If so, we might demand that ritually slaughtered animals be “compensated” for their experiencing a more painful death by raising these animals in better conditions than others.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.