This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sandra-the-orangutan-inside-argentina-zoo-granted-human-rights-in-landmark-ruling-9940202.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Sandra the orangutan inside Argentina zoo granted 'human rights' in landmark ruling Orangutan inside Argentina zoo granted 'non-human person rights' in landmark ruling
(about 17 hours later)
An orangutan can be transferred from a zoo to a sanctuary after a court in Argentina declared in a landmark ruling that it is a “non-human person” which is unlawfully deprived of its freedom. Orangutans have been granted the status of "non-human persons" with legal rights in a landmark court ruling in Argentina. The decision clears the way for Sandra, a shy 29-year-old, to be freed from Buenos Aires Zoo after spending her entire life in captivity.
Animal rights campaigners filed a habeas corpus petition – a document used to challenge a human’s imprisonment – last month on behalf of Sumatran orangutan Sandra who turns 29 in February and lives at Buenos Aires Zoo. Experts said the verdict could open the floodgates to thousands of similar cases.
The court agreed Sandra, who was born into captivity in Rostock Zoo, Germany, before being transferred to Argentina two decades ago, deserved basic rights and can now live in a sanctuary in Brazil. The zoo has 10 working days to file an appeal. The ruling came after animal rights campaigners filed a habeas corpus petition – a document more typically used to challenge the legality of a person’s detention or imprisonment – on behalf of the Sumatran orangutan, who was born at a German zoo and was transferred to Buenos Aires two decades ago.
Buenos Aires Zoo's head of biology, Adrian Sestelo, rejected the idea that orangutans had emotional characteristics like humans and told La Nacion newspaper that they are naturally solitary animals who only come together to mate and care for their young. The outcome hinged on whether Sandra should be treated as a "thing" or a "person", with the Association of Officials and Lawyers for Animal Rights (Afada) arguing that she should not be treated as an object because of her intelligence and complex ways of thinking.
“When you don’t know the biology of a species, to unjustifiably claim it suffers abuse, is stressed or depressed, is to make one of man’s most common mistakes, which is to humanise animal behaviour,” he claimed. The court agreed that Sandra deserved the basic rights of a "non-human person".
Sandra once had a companion and gave birth to baby Shambira in 1999 before it had been taken to a different zoo, Sestelo said. Orangutans are part of the family Hominidae – or great ape – along with gorillas, chimpanzees and humans. With a name which translates from Malay as "man of the forest", orangutans share about 97 per cent of their DNA with humans.
The successful case could pave the way for more petitions as the Association of Officials and Lawyers for Animal Rights argued that the orangutan – which means “forest man” in Malay and Indonesian – has sufficient cognitive ability and should not be treated as an object. "This opens the way not only for other great apes, but also for other sentient beings which are unfairly and arbitrarily deprived of their liberty in zoos, circuses, water parks and scientific laboratories," Afada lawyer Paul Buompadre told Argentina’s La Nacion newspaper.
"This opens the way not only for other Great Apes, but also for other sentient beings which are unfairly and arbitrarily deprived of their liberty in zoos, circuses, water parks and scientific laboratories," said Afada lawyer Paul Buompadre as reported by La Nacion. Sandra will be transferred to a sanctuary in Brazil unless the zoo appeals within the next 10 days. The zoo was tight-lipped yesterday about its next move. However, its head of biology, Adrian Sestelo, indicated that he thought it inappropriate to compare the animal with a human.
"When you don’t know the biology of a species, to unjustifiably claim it suffers abuse, is stressed or depressed, is to make one of man’s most common mistakes, which is to humanise animal behaviour," he said.
Sandra's case was the latest in a series that have attempted to give the non-human members of the great ape family human status – all of which have failed, until now.
Sandra’s victory was an appeal against an earlier rejection, while a high-profile case in New York earlier this month dismissed Tommy the chimpanzee’s quest for freedom, which was being made on the grounds that he was a “person”.
  
A court in the US this month threw out a similar case campaigning for the freedom of Tommy the chimpanzee, who was held by a private owner in New York. The state ruled that the chimp is not a “person” that is entitled to the rights and protections afforded by habeas corpus. In their ruling on the privately owned, retired entertainment chimp living in cage in New York state, the judges said: “So far as legal theory is concerned, a person is any being whom the law regards as capable of rights and duties. Needless to say, unlike human beings, chimpanzees cannot bear any legal duties, submit to societal responsibilities or be held accountable for their actions.”
In 2011, the animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) took marine park operator SeaWorld to court over allegations that they treated five wild-captured orca whales like slaves. A San Diego court dismissed the case. The Nonhuman Rights Project, which brought the case, said it would appeal.