Criminalizing protest is nothing new, but the animal rights movement is becoming more of a target. We talk to Dr. Liz Hicks of Melbourne University, who specialises in the law regarding animal rights and legal measures in Australia, the USA, and Europe, to restrict access to information and the right to protest.

Donate here: https://ko-fi.com/animalrightsdebate Join the WhatsApp community: https://chat.whatsapp.com/LTGteTLZkwI9XUtB1Xxfen Find out more: https://linktr.ee/animalrightsdebate

Animals have the status of objects in law, and so a dog is the property of his/her owner. Surely then, breaking into the owner's premises and taking the owner's dog without consent must then constitute theft? Not necessarily so. At Cambridge Crown Court recently, a jury found that defendants had not acted dishonestly in removing [some might say rescuing] beagles from MBR, a breeding facility where the dogs would be used in medical research.

We consider some of the legal issues arising out of the two trials that have taken place, each with a different outcome. We also discuss the amendment to legislation that will make it a criminal offence to interfere with the use or operation of an animal research facility, and the prospect of a legal challenge to the legality of such a provision.

We also acknowledge the contribution of the late Brigitte Bardot, the first celebrity to champion the cause of animal rights at a time else when no other public figure seemed to care.

A radical plan to improve the lives of animals, or empty promises that are bound to fail?

We consider the U.K. Government's recently published Animal Welfare Strategy, which acknowledges the moral dimension of our relationship with other animals, and the ways in which it seeks to address current shortcomings.