Controversial dog culling strategy challenged in court

KARACHI: A bench of the Sindh High Court headed by Sindh Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah on Tuesday issued notices to the provincial advocate general, Karachi Metropolitan Corporation and the Cantonment Board Clifton on a petition calling for an end to the practice of poisoning stray dogs.

The petitioners, Kamal Siddiqi and Mohammad Asad Iftikhar, have challenged the city authorities’ pye dog population control strategy by highlighting the fact that the Sindh Local Government Act, 2013, provides clear guidelines for the purpose which were being blatantly ignored.

He stated that the respondents were continuing with the brutal practice without any legal cover, and pointed out that the SLGA 2013 even provides the option of establishing animal welfare centres for stray animals.

The court was told that an alternate strategy to control pye dog population – ‘capture, vaccination, sterilisation and release’ – was in use the world over and the same should be applied in Karachi.

Citing Sections 25 and 29 of the law, the petitioners’ counsel submitted that the respondent authorities have made no efforts to draw up by-laws regarding population control of stray and dangerous animals.

The counsel submitted that 800 dogs were killed in District South during the month of August, which had caused much furore among the masses. The court was told that an animal rights’ body – the Pakistan Animal Welfare Society (Paws) – has launched a petition calling for an end to the practice of poisoning stray dogs which, till date, has garnered 17,000 signatures.

The court was requested to declare the acts of the respondents as illegal, unjustifiable and unreasonable, and restrain the KMC, DHA and CBC from killing stray dogs in the city anymore. 

After hearing the preliminary arguments, the SHC bench headed by CJ Shah issued notices to the Sindh advocate general and other respondents, calling for their comments at the next hearing.  The date of the next hearing would be notified later by the court’s office.