Various animal welfare advocates have filed a petition before the Office of the Mayor, raising objections to portions of the Cebu City Animal Welfare Ordinance, which they described as potentially causing ‘deplorable injustice and cruelty.’
In a 12-page petition addressed to Cebu City Mayor Nestor Archival, the groups sought the suspension and amendment of specific provisions of Ordinance No. 2526, Series of 2019, also known as the Animal Welfare Ordinance of Cebu City.
The petitioners argued that certain sections of the measure are ‘prejudicial to the marginalized and indigent sectors, particularly to pet owners.’
Among the provisions they questioned were: Extortionate and Unwarranted Fees Imposed on Registration and Public Services and Fines for Failure to Comply; Mandatory Submission of Pets for Animal Population Control (Spay and Neuter); and Undue Prejudice Against Marginalized and Indigent Pet Owners in Favor of Pet Breeders in the Reproduction or Procreation of Companion Animals.
‘Unfortunately, it seems that there has been a vital element glaringly wanting in the crafting process of the ordinance,’ they said.
They added that adequate public consultations with animal welfare groups, stakeholders, and affected pet owners may have been excluded during the drafting of the measure.
As a result, they said, some provisions turned out to be ‘arbitrary, prejudicial against pet owners, anti-poor, utterly oppressive, and unconstitutional.’
In line with this, the petition calls for the suspension and amendment of certain provisions of the ordinance, particularly those they described as imposing ‘extortionate and unwarranted fees and fines.’
They cited Section 28 of the ordinance, titled Fees, which sets registration fees at ?200 and registration with microchip at ?600.
According to the petitioners, even the Anti-Rabies Act of 2007 does not require pet owners to pay a registration fee.
‘If this is the case, then it would appear that the anti-rabies vaccine is not really free as prescribed by the Anti-Rabies Act of 2007 and this Ordinance, and, as a consequence, the pet owners, notwithstanding the responsible ones, are being systematically penalized, compelled to subsidize the anti-rabies vaccine, and forced to shoulder the lucrative operation,’ their petition further reads.
While acknowledging Cebu City as a ‘progressive local government’ where 94 percent of households own pets, they said the imposition of such fees could be ‘preposterously staggering.’
To them, this constitutes a form of ’emotional blackmail’ to allegedly ‘unnecessarily’ fund the operations of the Department of Veterinary Medicine and Fisheries (DVMF) at the expense of marginalized pet owners.
Under this section, they recommended retaining the existing spay and neuter fees for dogs and cats but urged the city to refrain from imposing additional on-the-spot or incidental charges for supplies.
The petitioners also raised concerns over Section 5 of the same ordinance, which they described as ‘utterly defective, oppressive, and discriminatory.’
According to them, the provision implies the possibility of indiscriminate mass culling of aspins (asong Pinoy) and puspins (pusang Pinoy), while favoring registered pet breeders over marginalized pet owners.
They noted that nowhere in Republic Act No. 9482, or the Anti-Rabies Act of 2007, does it state that spaying or neutering is a mandatory responsibility of pet owners.
‘The Cebu City Government, unnecessarily blinded with misguided overzealousness, has made it a priority the implementation of the so-called ‘Animal Population Control Program’ spearheaded by the Department of Veterinary Medicine and Fisheries (DVMF),’ they said.
The petitioners urged the city mayor, vice mayor, and members of the City Council to amend provisions of the ordinance that they consider unlawful and oppressive, saying these work ‘to the extreme prejudice of pet owners, particularly the marginalized and indigent.’