Below are various publications from BAWP panel members, Secretariat members, and others.


You are also invited to have a read of an article by the Panel’s own Graeme McEwen:

Graeme McEwen, ‘Strategic Litigation and Law Reform’ 7 Journal of Animal Law 91 (2011)  

With welfare thresholds so low for intensively produced and other animals, successful prosecution is difficult. Yet the concerned lawyer by being creative can take on an entire industry in respect of millions of animals rather than just prosecute one individual’s maltreatment of a few animals. Further, producer resistance to change can induce aggressive litigation intended to silence the welfare message eg the suit by Australian wool producers against PETA invoking the secondary boycott provisions of a federal statute to claim substantial damages arising from PETA’S threatened boycott of Australian wool products whilst Australia persisted with mulesing and live sheep exports. This type of case requires its own legal ingenuity and strategy to protect public advocates, including a close examination of constitutional protections of ‘free speech’.

Or again, what is the legal position where CDs and documents are ‘leaked’ to an animal society which in turn publishes them to its website, so publicly pointing up arguably impermissible, heavily intrusive research procedures upon primates with grave consequences for their welfare? Is the animal society to be silenced on grounds of breach of confidence and copyright, or can the public interest confer a countervailing defence? This was explored in the UK’s Imutran case. Strategic public interest litigation is a central part of the legal armoury for the concerned lawyer. Combined with advocacy of law reform at a federal rather than state level, each stands to forge new headway in the struggle for legislative change.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.