This august World Assembly,
Believing that GAR #477, “Convention on Animal Testing,” is well-meaning in its attempt to place ethical restrictions on the use of animal test subjects,
Noting, however, that the definition of “ethical testing” in Clause 1, Section C, limits the scope of the resolution to preventing testing that is maliciously intended to cause harm or distress to animals,
Realizing that it is difficult and laborious to prove whether an individual intended to maliciously harm a test animal or if the harm was caused by negligence or carelessness,
Further realizing that an administrator of a facility could order an employee to carry out a procedure that causes more harm to the animal than necessary, leading to the employee causing harm while not maliciously intending to, making conviction impossible because the administrator has the malicious intent while the employee actual carries out the procedure,
Convinced that the World Assembly Board of Bioethics is almost useless, as its main purpose is to report instances of noncompliance by member nations through the resolution’s definition of “ethical testing,” which member nations can easily dodge by taking advantage of the resolution's narrow scope,
Further convinced that the definition of “ethical testing” allows for animals to experience significant distress and harm as long as tests are not done in a malicious manner or that the harm and distress during the tests is “moderate,”
Noting that the division between “severe” distress or harm and moderate distress or harm is not made objectively measurable in any way at all in the target resolution, allowing member nations to set an arbitrary and undesirably high threshold for severity,
Believing that Clause 3 is rendered null, as, given the resolution’s definition of “ethical testing”, the WABB is unable to create reports of unethical testing; it is impossible to prove a researcher’s or facility’s intent,
Horrified that Clause 4 Section A’s ambiguity in using the term “procedures” allows for testing facilities to adopt the definition of said term that is most favourable to them and thus avoid reporting crucial matters, including instances of abuse of test animals,
Worried that Clause 5 does not provide a time frame for when a research facility is “finished” with a test animal, allowing nations to keep abusing animals by claiming their negligence through the vagueness of “ethical testing,”
Further worried that Clause 7 is rendered almost useless, as test animals can be killed in a non-cruel manner before reaching “former test animal” status, as killing test animals is only prohibited after experiments on them are concluded,
Anxious that, in addition to this, Clause 7 even gives research facilities the incentive to find a way to kill no longer needed test animals within the course of animal testing, so as to avoid having to support them and attempt to adopt them out,
Concluding that the clear potential for evading the requirements apparently imposed by the target resolution render it ineffective,
Hoping that the repeal of GAR #477 will lead to an effective replacement being passed in its place,
Hereby repeals GAR #477 “Convention On Animal Testing.”
Co-authored by
Maowi.
