Allegations against forest officials, of mishandling the pachyderms while removing them from their homes, need to be probed thoroughly
The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) needs to order an inquiry into the circumstances in which three elephants — Sandhya (45), Indumati (35) and Jayanti (21) — were shifted on September 26 evening from the facility in which they had been living, to the State-run Elephant Care Facility at the MR Palayam Elephant Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre, Trichy, Tamil Nadu. According to a petition addressed to the Union Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Prakash Javadekar, by the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations (FIAPO), and hosted by Change.Org, “forest department officers along with six mahouts who were called in from Anamalai Tiger Reserve, brutally and inhumanely transferred these gentle animals into a truck — shoving them with an earth-mover, dragging them with ropes, beating them and using bullhooks (also known as ankush) in the process.”
That the allegation cannot be dismissed off-hand is clear from a report by Nandalal published in The New Indian Express on September 27 under the heading, “Tamil Nadu: Forest officials accused of beating elephants, using JCB to shift them.” A paragraph in the report reads, “According to sources at the EleFriends101 elephant care facility, these men, who were in a tearing hurry, resorted to hitting them with bamboo sticks. The youngest elephant, Jayanthi, even had to endure beatings with a bullhook for putting up a resistance.” The report added, “The officers were having a tough time trying to get the elephants into the trucks. They even used a JCB to push them into the trucks,” said a staff member at the centre, who did not want to be named.
Are the allegations correct? The newspaper report further stated, “When contacted, the forest officer denied the use of bamboo sticks and bullhooks to make the elephants climb the trucks. But the videos sent from the site and what we witnessed tell an entirely different tale.” If there is an iota of truth in the allegations, the conduct of the forest department officials involved clearly violated the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The latter refers in Section 11. (1) (a), to any person who “beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise treats any animal so as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering or causes, or being the owner permits, any animal to be so treated.” It then states later in the same section that such a person would be punishable by fine “or with imprisonment for a term which may extend, to three months, or with both.”
It should also be investigated whether the manner of transporting the three elephants violated any provision of the “Guidelines for the Care and Management of Captive Elephants” issued on January 8, 2008 by Project Elephant under what was then the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF). Particular attention should be paid to two aspects. The first is the provision under the heading “Norms and Standard for Transportation” which reads, “The elephant should be fed and given water before loading.” Was this done? Second, a provision under the heading “Transportation of Elephants” reads, “A valid health certificate from a veterinary doctor to the effect that the elephant is fit to travel by road or rail, as the case may be, and is not showing any sign of infection or contagious disease shall be obtained.” Was such a certificate obtained? If so, when were the three elephants in question examined? It is imperative to ask another question in this context: Did any veterinary doctor from the forest department visit the facility to examine them prior to September 26? If not, the health certificate had to be issued by a veterinary doctor accompanying the team forcibly removing the three elephants. Even if such a doctor had accompanied the team, could he/she have done an adequate job of medically examining them in the midst of the hurry and forcible removal that, by all accounts, had occurred?
What is particularly horrifying is that the allegations, which, prima facie, can by no means be dismissed, have been levelled against forest department officials who are supposed to adhere to and enforce laws and guidelines and not violate these blatantly. Not only should a credible and thorough investigation, covering all aspects of the incident, be held but exemplary punishment given to those, if any, found guilty. Violations of laws and guidelines will tend to become routine throughout India if those guilty go unpunished. More, the proneness to perpetrate illegal acts reflects a certain tendency. If not countered at every step, it will grow and in the case of wildlife, come to include offences like complicity with poachers, allegations of which are not unknown. In fact, the entire approach of the officials shows total unfamiliarity with the psyche of elephants, who are highly intelligent animals, sensitive to human attitudes and capable of understanding the thrust of human speech. Instead of just arriving one evening to take the elephants away from a place where they had lived for three-and-a-half years, the officials should have visited them several times earlier to win their trust and friendship. It might have been a very different story then. India has over 2,400 captive elephants. Should such officials have anything to do with their fates?
(The writer is Consultant Editor, The Pioneer, and an author)
