Sandra is 29. She lives in Buenos Aires, her forced city of adoption. She was born in Germany.
This person now can leave her solitary live behind bars and the nearby crowds observing her and commenting about her will be soon an old memory.
Sandra is a single parent, and there's a (now) minor detail about her: Sandra is an orangutan.
Other courts had rejected the writ, but yesterday, in an unprecedented decision, the National Court of Criminal Cassation at Buenos Aires revoked previous rulings and declare her to be a "non human person". I add, "real" to that.
Argentine laws declare a person to be someone or something that can have rights and obligations and divide them in "real" and "ideal". The real person in cast as that one with "evident signs of humanity". The ideal person can't act by itself because it's a notion and an organization. There are public and private ideal people, necessary (like government) or not (like corporations), even public but not governmental, like political parties. Ideal people have a lot of right, even some that are associated to bone and flesh humans, like the right to honour and the right to privacy.
Well, yesterday's ruling create a division in the former group under the label "real person": the non-human person, like Sandra. She is no longer a thing with special rights, but a real person with the right of freedom and privacy she is lacking in Buenos Aires' Zoo (the very same the character "Charles Darwin" is in when he is introduced in the film "The Fall"). So she has now more rights than those Ota Benga enjoyed.
Sorry I have no source in English for the details, but this is pretty much it. I'm opening a thread about it because this is really a subject open to sceptical scrutiny.
The ruling is short and they say it not to be solidly founded in doctrine, maybe because it was done in a hectic period as local courts started today a 6-week Xmas-summer vacation. But basically the ruling acknowledges the sensitivity and high cognitive abilities of the person.
Now, other people will decide for her -as always- and she will be moved to a wildlife refuge where she will happily be able to die from pneumonia next Winter or so.
This person now can leave her solitary live behind bars and the nearby crowds observing her and commenting about her will be soon an old memory.
Sandra is a single parent, and there's a (now) minor detail about her: Sandra is an orangutan.
Other courts had rejected the writ, but yesterday, in an unprecedented decision, the National Court of Criminal Cassation at Buenos Aires revoked previous rulings and declare her to be a "non human person". I add, "real" to that.
Argentine laws declare a person to be someone or something that can have rights and obligations and divide them in "real" and "ideal". The real person in cast as that one with "evident signs of humanity". The ideal person can't act by itself because it's a notion and an organization. There are public and private ideal people, necessary (like government) or not (like corporations), even public but not governmental, like political parties. Ideal people have a lot of right, even some that are associated to bone and flesh humans, like the right to honour and the right to privacy.
Well, yesterday's ruling create a division in the former group under the label "real person": the non-human person, like Sandra. She is no longer a thing with special rights, but a real person with the right of freedom and privacy she is lacking in Buenos Aires' Zoo (the very same the character "Charles Darwin" is in when he is introduced in the film "The Fall"). So she has now more rights than those Ota Benga enjoyed.
Sorry I have no source in English for the details, but this is pretty much it. I'm opening a thread about it because this is really a subject open to sceptical scrutiny.
The ruling is short and they say it not to be solidly founded in doctrine, maybe because it was done in a hectic period as local courts started today a 6-week Xmas-summer vacation. But basically the ruling acknowledges the sensitivity and high cognitive abilities of the person.
Now, other people will decide for her -as always- and she will be moved to a wildlife refuge where she will happily be able to die from pneumonia next Winter or so.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1AuyRYD
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire