Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

The Bar Council Human Rights Committee (BCHRC) notes that the issue of animal testing laboratories in Malaysia has yet to be fully resolved and that the latest press report by an English-language daily published on 8 July 2010 states that a meeting of officials from the Ministries of Natural Resources and Environment; Science, Technology and Innovation; Health; and Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry is scheduled to take place later this month.  We offer some thoughts on this matter to assist the aforesaid Ministries in their deliberations.

The BCHRC is of the view that any animal testing laboratory to be set up in Malaysia (be it in Malacca or elsewhere) must at all times adhere to ethical and humane treatment of its test subjects.  Such treatment must be mandated by laws and regulations.  The BCHRC urges Parliament to amend the Animals Act 1953 (amended 2006) to include proper regulations and guidelines with regard to animals used as test subjects in any laboratory or academic faculty for the purposes for medical and scientific testing.  In short, such rules and regulations pertaining to the treatment and holding of animals in a testing laboratory must take into account the fact that the animals must not be subjected to torture and abuse.  The laboratory should keep the pain and suffering of such test subjects to a bare minimum.

The BCHRC further states that the source of the animals that are to be used as test subjects and how they were obtained must be fully disclosed.  Furthermore the active participation of the Wildlife Department and non-governmental organisations must be allowed in order to ensure that no animal is illegally traded, stolen or abused.
 
We are strongly against the abuse of any animals kept in the captivity of the testing laboratory.  The testing laboratory must adhere to rules of transparency and disclosure of the list of animals,and the species of such animals that are being used for testing in order to prevent any endangered species from being used for test purposes.  If the testing laboratory is or intends breeding its own animals, then the Health Ministry should also be involved to ensure that any outbreak of infectious dieases is prevented.
 
The BCHRC also feels that the Animals Act 1953 (amended 2006) is nonetheless insufficiently up-to-date notwithstanding that it was amended in 2006, and does not reflect current international best practices.  We would refer to ethical guidelines such as those contained in the International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals issued by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) in 1985, and periodically updated, as indicative of exisiting international best practices,.  This document provides criteria for establishing codes of practice or legislation concerning the use of animals in scientific research.  We commend these guiding principles as a reference point for our Parliamentarians.  The CIOMS is an international, non-governmental, not-for-profit organizaion established jointly by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and UNESCO, and is based at the WHO headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. 
 
The BCHRC would also propose that the Animals Act 1953 (amended 2006) be further amended to include harsher penalties for offenders.  The current provisions for punishment are too light and may not serve as an effective deterrent against breaches of the law.
 
The BCHRC calls on politicians and those in authority to consider the sensitivities of the public when making statements on the issue of animal testing.  Not all Malaysians would agree with the view supposedly expressed by the Chief Minister of Malacca who was reported by The Guardian in the UK on 31 May 2010 as having said that animals were created for testing.  Clearly there are different views. 
 
Indeed it is perhaps timely that the relevant authorities now engage with the public and non-governmental organisations to consider whether there is actually a need for the existence of animal testing laboratories in this country.  There are after all known alternatives to animal testing.  In any debate or discussion on this issue, the views of pro-animal rights groups will need to be carefully balanced against the need (real or perceived) for such animal testing laboratories to exist.  The BCHRC calls for more public discussion on this issue in order that the views of all interested parties can be fully ventilated.