Risks and Rewards: On Jallikattu deaths : Daily Current Affairs

Date: 20/01/2023

Relevance: GS-2: Indian Constitution, Fundamental Rights ,Supreme Court Judgement.

Relevance: GS-3: Biodiversity protection and related laws; Animal Welfare.

Key Phrases: Animal Welfare Board, Jallikattu Sport, Cultural Right under Article 29 of the Constitution of India, Supreme Court Judgement, Articles 51A(g) and 51A(h) of the Constitution of India (Fundamental duty), Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Context:

The deaths of five men in Tamil Nadu in as many events of jallikattu and manjuvirattu — in Madurai, Tiruchi, Sivaganga, Pudukottai and Karur districts — and injuries to dozens of persons this week, though unfortunate, are no surprise.
On 9th Dec 2022, the Supreme Court of India reserved its judgement on a batch of petitions questioning the validity of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act of 2017.

Key Highlights:

According to the Animal Welfare Board of India, between 2008-14, there have been 43 deaths and thousands of injuries.
- As of now, zero human casualty remains an elusive goal, not to speak of the plight of the animal.
In November 2022, the Constitution Bench of SC, which heard arguments over the amendment, observed that the sport of jallikattu as such might not be brutal but the “form” in which it was being held in the State might be cruel.

What is Jallikattu?

Jallikattu is a bull taming sport, played in Tamil Nadu around the time of Pongal festival in January every year.
Native breeds of bulls are released into a crowd of people, and multiple participants attempt to grab the large hump on the bull’s back with both arms and hang on to it while the bull attempts to escape.
The Tamil Nadu government claims that the sport plays an important role in preserving and promoting the culture of breeding native bull breeds, and ensures their survival.

What has the Tamilnadu Government done?

It is comforting that the authorities have tightened the rules.
- In Madurai district, which has 21 venues, an online registration system allowed bull owners to choose only one out of the three high-profile venues — Avaniapuram, Palamedu and Alanganallur.
- In Trichy, no more than 700 bulls can be released at each event.
Elaborate guidelines were issued by the State Animal Husbandry, Dairying, Fishing and Fishermen Welfare Department in late December, on the duties and responsibilities for each stakeholder.

Legal Battle Timeline

Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court on Jallikattu in 2014:
- In May 2014, a Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court, in Animal Welfare Board of India v A. Nagaraja, banned the use of bulls for Jallikattu events in the state, and bullock cart races across the country.
  - In 2015 the Court dismissed the Tamil Nadu government’s plea seeking a review of the 2014 Judgement.
Union’s Notification 2016:
- On January 7th, 2016, Union issued a notification directing the States to comply with the A. Nagaraja Judgment.
  - However, the notification allowed Jallikattu to be practised while imposing certain restrictions to accommodate animal rights concerns.
- Animal rights activists from across the country challenged the notification at the Supreme Court in 2016.
Tamil Nadu Amendment Act in 2017:
- However, while the petitions were pending, the Tamil Nadu government passed the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act in January 2017 which permitted the sport and introduced rules to govern the practice under Section 3(2).
Writ Petition in the Supreme Court 2018:
- Many organisations including People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), filed writ petitions seeking directions from the SC to quash the Tamil Nadu amendment to the Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals Act, 1960 (PCA Act) which permitted Jallikattu.
  - The challenges were primarily mounted on the ground that it circumvented Supreme Court’s Judgement in A. Nagaraja.
  - It further contended that only the Union government has the power to frame rules under PCA Act and hence the rules framed by the Tamil Nadu Legislature are invalid and therefore inapplicable.
  - The petitions also argue that Jallikattu does not have any religious significance, and was found to be cruel as per Nagaraja and against Section 11 of the PCA Act which prohibits cruelty against animals.
5-Judge Constitution Bench of SC:
- On February 2nd, 2018, a Supreme Court Bench referred this batch of writ petitions to a 5-Judge Constitution Bench.
- A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on 9th Dec 2022 reserved for judgement a batch of petitions seeking to strike down a Tamil Nadu law which protects Jallikattu by claiming that the bull-taming sport is a cultural heritage of the State and is protected under Article 29 (1) of the Constitution.

What are the Key Issues pending in the Writ Petition?

Is the Tamil Nadu Amendment contrary to Entry 17 of the Concurrent List in the Constitution of India, by perpetuating cruelty to animals?
Is the sport of Jallikattu protected as a cultural right under Article 29 of the Constitution of India?
Is Jallikattu essential to ensure the survival and well-being of the native breed of bulls involved in the sport
Is the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act violative of Articles 51A(g) and 51A(h) of the Constitution of India, which place the duty of protecting the environment and developing a ‘scientific temper’ upon all citizens, as it promotes a bull taming sport?
Can the Act be said to be unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India?
Is the impugned Tamil Nadu Amendment Act directly contrary to the Judgment in A. Nagaraja?
Does the Tamil Nadu Legislature have the power to amend the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960?

Way Forward:

The rules should have stringent penal provisions for ensuring safety in the sport.
The authorities should focus on preventing deaths, at least among spectators, who should be behind impregnable barricades.
The government should end the practice of having fancy prizes, such as cars and motorcycles, to draw in youth.

Conclusion:

Jallikattu was originally meant to showcase strength and valour, and the rewards should not be seen as an incentive to overlook the risks to life and limb.

Source: The Hindu

Mains Question:

Q. What are the key issues pending in the writ petitions of jallikattu case? Also, suggest some progressive measures for organising the jallikattu sport in a healthy and zero death manner. (250 Words).