EU court adviser backs ritual animal slaughter without stunning

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – EU judges should strike down a Belgian law requiring all animals be stunned prior to their death, which has effectively outlawed slaughter according to Jewish and Muslim rites, an EU court adviser said on Thursday.

Gerard Hogan, an advocate general of the Court of Justice of the European Union, said an EU law of 2009 set out that animals should normally be stunned before they are slaughtered, but made a clear exception for slaughter prescribed by religious rites.

EU judges typically follow the opinions of advocate generals although are not bound to do so. They would normally deliver their ruling in two to four months.

The case came to the EU court in Luxembourg after a 2017 decree in the Belgian region of Flanders to amend its law on protection and welfare of animals by requiring all animals be first stunned.

Jewish and Muslim association challenged the decree and Belgium’s Constitutional Court referred the case to the EU Court of Justice.

Hogan said the religious exception reflected the European Union’s desire to respect freedom of religion and the right to manifest religious belief in practice and observance despite avoidable suffering caused to animals.

Jewish and Muslim methods of slaughter involves the animals’ throats being cut with a sharp knife, which advocates says results in death almost immediately. Traditionally, prior stunning is not permitted.

Belgian campaign group Global Action in the Interest of Animals (GAIA), whose representatives were present at the court on Thursday, said it was disappointed and perplexed by the opinion, but noted the judges might rule differently.

“How will the court deal with (EU) members that have for years had general bans on slaughter without stunning: Denmark, parts of Finland, Slovenia and Sweden?” said GAIA lawyer Anthony Godfroid.

(Reporting by Philip Blenkinsop, editing by Marine Strauss and Toby Chopra)


4 replies

  1. am not an expert, but I would not see any problIem from the Islamic point of view that the animal is stunned before slaughter. After stunning the Islamic way of slaughtering is still possible, I would think.

    • Yes, I disagree. Stunning could result in the death of the animal which we are not allowed to then consume. Also, when we follow the Islamic/Jewish way of slaughter as prescribed in the law, we are supposed to use a sharp knife and at one go cut the throat without severing the spine will immediately result in the carotid artery and jugular vein cut which will result in all the blood flowing out of the brain and hence the animal will have died to all intents and purposes.

      The only thing that will still show is the animal involuntarily moving due to the spine still being intact which is purposely kept so – so that as much blood as possible will flow out of the body. As you know we are not allowed to consume blood.

      Of course, this way of slaughter will also result in the meat being healthier to consume,,,,,

      Animal rights people never seem to consider if their way of slaughter will be healthier to consume for humans. They are ONLY thinking about the animals. But, even from their point of view, our way is the most merciful.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: