The Giordano Bruno Stiftung criticized the decision of the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig to authorize Muslims to ritually slaughter animals in Germany. Freedom of religion undermining animal protection in this way is not justifiable, foundation spokesman Michael Schmidt-Salomon explained on the occasion of an event at the foundation's headquarters in Mastershausen.

During ritual halal slaughter, animals are fixated in full consciousness, then their neck is cut with a knife. Death occurs by bleeding, which, according to veterinary findings, is associated with prolonged agony, particularly in the case of slaughtered cattle.

Here you can find the full text of the Giordano Bruno Stiftung's press release: "Ritual slaughter legal? Why freedom of religion must be limited by animal welfare

Press release by the Giordano Bruno Foundation on the verdict of the Leipzig Federal Administrative Court
 

Mastershausen, 26 November 2006

Mastershausen. The Giordano Bruno Stiftung criticized the decision by the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig to authorize Muslims to slaughter animals ritually in Germany. Freedom of religion undermining animal protection in this way is not justifiable, foundation spokesman Michael Schmidt-Salomon explained on the occasion of an event at the foundation's headquarters in Mastershausen. During halal ritual slaughter, animals are fixated in full consciousness, then their neck is cut with a knife.

Death occurs by bleeding, which, according to veterinary findings, is associated with prolonged agony, particularly in the case of slaughtered cattle. Schmidt-Salomon said that "in jurisdiction secular standards must necessarily apply". It is unacceptable that religions could place themselves "by law above the law." "Animal welfare is an important achievement of our constitutional state," Schmidt-Salomon explained. "Since animals are sentient beings, we have an ethical obligation to further develop their rights. The desire of some fellow citizens to follow religious rites of an archaic culture cannot be a sufficient reason to permit them to torture animals."

The Federal Administrative Court had argued in its ruling that without an amendment to the Animal Welfare Act, ritual slaughtering could not be prohibited for Muslims. According to § 4a of the Animal Protection Act, killing warm-blooded animals without prior stunning is prohibited. Exceptions to this are emergency slaughtering and a special official permit. According to law, such permits may be granted to representatives of religious groups if "mandatory regulations of their religious community prescribe the ritual slaughtering of animals or prohibit the consumption of meat from non-ritually slaughtered animals."

gbs spokesman Schmidt-Salomon pleaded for the deletion of such religiously justified special permits from the law, "so that the protection of animals, which is established in section 20a of the Basic Law, is not further undermined."