ANIMALAW: An Interdisciplinary Analysis of Animal Welfare Offences

• In Event: GREEN Panel 2, Addressing Environmental and Animal Harm: Regulation and Enforcement Across Jurisdictions

Abstract

This paper examines how animal welfare offences in animal transport are handled by Danish criminal courts, reflecting ideals of animal welfare, veterinary expertise, and legal transparency. Our analysis probes into contemporary, evolving human-animal relationships and advancements in animal biology, exploring how these shifts are reflected in legislation and case law.
By combining legal analysis, veterinary assessments, and anthropological studies, we investigate how knowledge about animal welfare is created, interpreted, and applied within the Danish legal system. This provides a valuable lens for assessing whether legal practices adequately consider the welfare of animals, particularly in cases where legal definitions of suffering and welfare remain ambiguous.
We identify several critical issues in Danish animal welfare cases. One of the most significant challenges is the discrepancy between veterinary assessments and legal rulings. Courts often base their decisions on a combination of previous case law, expert knowledge, and ‘common sense.’ However, our findings indicate that there are inconsistencies between recent developments in animal welfare science and legal decisions. For instance, terms such as 'pain' and 'suffering' are interpreted differently depending on the context, creating uncertainty in legal practice.
Finally, we highlight that the legal treatment of animal welfare cases is occurring within an increasingly complex scientific context. The growing recognition of animals’ sensory and cognitive capacities introduces a new dimension to legislation, where judges and other legal professionals must navigate a field shaped by legal principles, scientific evaluations, and evolving ethical norms. We argue that legal systems must evolve to better integrate contemporary knowledge about animal biology and welfare, ensuring that legal protections reflect their moral and scientific standing.

Authors

• Louise Victoria Johansen, University of Copenhagen

• Mette S. Herskin, University of Aarhus

• Kirstin Dahl-Pedersen, University of Copenhagen

• Peter T. Thomsen, University of Aarhus

• Søren Stig Andersen, University of Copenhagen