Towards a Vegan Jurisprudence: The Need for a Reorientation of Human Rights Jeanette Karen Rowley LLM, BA Hons, PG Cert. Ed. FHEA A thesis submitted to Lancaster University for the degree of PhD Lancaster Law School Lancaster University 4 July 2017 0 Abstract The objective of this thesis is to develop a new way of thinking about the theory and practice of human rights to accommodate the demands of vegans for basic moral rights for nonhuman animals. The work firstly outlines the ways in which the claims of vegans, under the right to freedom of thought and conscience, are largely unsupported by existing human rights because they are typically outweighed by the wider interests of the majority. Drawing on the work of Emmanuel Levinas, the thesis considers arguments that ground the nature of vegan claims in the ethics of alterity. It specifically utilises the argument that the basis of human rights recognises ethical responsibility to the precarious, mortal other. Upendra Baxi cautiously supports the application of Levinas’ philosophy to the ethics of law, and there is a slowly growing body of literature in this regard. This thesis is the first human rights work to show that Levinas’ ethics of alterity can also be applied to nonhuman others, and that human rights arguments can include claims that the avoidable suffering of nonhuman animals is a human rights wrong. The argument developed within this thesis allows a reconceptualisation of the human rights demands of vegans as claims representing a well-established ethical regard for nonhumans. Looking to Levinas’ ethics of alterity not only illustrates a new approach to human rights litigation to accommodate vegans but also grounds the protection of other animals and allows for a reconceptualisation of the very idea of human rights. 1 ‘So strong is man’s aversion to all killing …’ Leo Tolstoy, ‘Introduction’ in Howard Williams, The Ethics of Diet: An Anthology of Vegetarian Thought (White Crow Books 2009) 39. 2 Declaration 1. I declare that the work contained herein has been entirely composed by me and is the product of my own intellectual effort. In addition, I confirm that no part of this thesis has been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification. 2. Extracts from parts of this thesis have already been published: Jeanette Rowley, Human Rights are Animal Rights: The Implications of Ethical Veganism for Human Rights published in Critical Perspectives on Veganism edited by Jodey Castricano and Rasmus R. Simonsen, 2016, The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series reproduced with permission of Springer Nature, Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland. I declare that this published material was not co-authored, was composed entirely by me and was the product of my own intellectual effort. 3 Acknowledgements I would firstly like to thank Lancaster University and the Law School for giving me the opportunity to undertake research on this topic. I have benefitted from its well-thought-out research training and assessment process and financial support to present at conferences in Toulouse and Australia. I am especially grateful to my supervisors, Professor Steven Wheatley and Dr Bela Bonita Chatterjee, for their enduring professional approach, for their enthusiastic support and for providing the nurturing environment needed for the thesis to be progressed and completed. I would also like to acknowledge the following: Dr Kevin Watson, whose exceptional support at the beginning of my thinking on this subject contributed to the positive employment conditions in which I could consider taking on a demanding, long-term research project; Anu from Switzerland who liaised with and arranged our presentation to Heiner Bielefeldt at the United Nations in Geneva; and all the vegans who have written to me with their accounts of negative experiences at work or as consumers expressing their support for the project. I am grateful for the support of The Vegan Society and the members of its Academic Research Committee. I am continually inspired by the work and support of newfound colleagues, many of whom – including Petr, Greg, Ralf and Barbara – have become new collaborators and friends. I am especially grateful to the team at the German VEBU for their collaboration to host symposiums on Veganism and Law. I acknowledge the attendees and inspiring speakers: Ralf, Till, Camille, Sissi, Barbara, Eberhart, Felix, Thomas, Helena, Aro and others – many of whom travelled some distance to participate. During the last six years, a number of other people have been more important than they realise. The Lancaster Academic Reading Group members – Mark, Dr Richard Twine, Emma, Pete and Jess – have been truly inspirational with their keenness and critical comments on our monthly readings. I couldn’t have presented in Australia without the help and support of Michael Green, Jackie, Simon, Paula, Ian, Sheena and Steve (or without the flexibility of their families). More recently, I have been motivated by the support of Associate Professor Jodey Castricano and Rasmus R Simonsen PhD, who invited me to write a chapter for their new publication. Barbara Gardner of Catholic Concern for Animals has also been generously complimentary and has asked to publish a presentation I gave to the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group on Vegetarianism and Veganism. I am especially delighted, honoured and humbled to be in receipt of motivational compliments from the founder of the concept of ‘speciesism’, Dr Richard D Ryder. As with any long-term project, a commitment to developing and writing this thesis has meant that other people are subject to my ordering of conflicting priorities. I am eternally grateful for the amazing support and understanding of my family. As I usually explain to students, life does not stop when you study. There have been various events, weddings, babies born and hospitalisations that I may have attended with pen, pad and books or articles to read. For this, though you totally understand, I apologise and sincerely hope that it will not be in vain in our combined efforts to speak truth to power and find the way to liberate a compassionate humanity and nonhuman others from enduring constraints. I want to say a huge thank you to Loukas for unwavering support: for the visits, food, walks, drinks and chats – but most of all for a limitless sense of humour on the difficult philosophy and especially for when I took reading material everywhere ‘just in case’. Finally, I want to acknowledge the inspirational nonhumans in my life: my long-term housemate, trainer and feline companion, Bunny, and the loving, welcoming others – Shady, Archie, Lilia, Oscar and Ebony – not forgetting Kitty, Ruby and many others now passed. 4 Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 1 Declaration ..................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ 4 Table of Authorities ....................................................................................................... 9 European Court of Human Rights cases .......................................................... 9 United Nations cases ...................................................................................... 9 Domestic cases .............................................................................................. 9 United States cases ........................................................................................ 9 Canadian cases ............................................................................................ 10 Israeli cases.................................................................................................. 10 German cases .............................................................................................. 10 South African cases ...................................................................................... 10 Australian cases ........................................................................................... 10 Employment Tribunal cases .......................................................................... 10 Treaties and declarations ............................................................................. 10 Other legal instruments ............................................................................... 10 Chapter 1 ...................................................................................................................... 11 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 11 The subject of this thesis .............................................................................. 11 1.1 The research questions ........................................................................... 13 1.2 The argument developed in this thesis .................................................... 14 1.3 Personal motivation and audience for the research ................................ 16 1.4 The context for the research: the situation for vegans ............................ 17 1.5 The current status of literature in the specific area ................................. 19 1.6 The context for the research: wider human and animal rights scholarship 20 1.7 The context for the research: wider human rights scholarship ................