HUMAN RIGHTS — Right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion — Policy of slaughter for cattle testing positive for bovine tuberculosis — Whether to be applied to sacred bullock of Hindu temple — Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, Pt I, art 9 — Council Directive 77/391/EEC

R (Swami Suryananda, representing the Community of the Many Names of God) v Welsh Ministers

CA: Pill, Thomas and Lloyd LJJ: 23 July 2007

The decision to slaughter a Hindu community’s temple bullock as part of a general government policy after testing positive for bovine tuberculosis was lawful and justified and was not a breach of article 9 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Though the decision interfered with the community’s right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion the interference was necessary and proportionate given the importance of eliminating bovine tuberculosis and the fact that the slaughter policy implemented Council Directive 77/391/EEC.

The Court of Appeal, sitting in Cardiff, so held allowing an appeal by Welsh Ministers from a decision of Judge Hickinbottom sitting as a deputy High Court judge in the Administrative Court of the Queen’s Bench Division on 16 July 2007 quashing an order under the Animal Health Act 1981 for the slaughter of Shambo, the temple bullock of the Community of the Many Names of God at Skanda Vale, Llanpumpsaint, Carmarthen, West Wales imposed on 3 May and 3 July 2007 by the Welsh Rural Affairs Minister.

PILL LJ said the preservation of life was fundamental to the community’s beliefs and it was a direct violation of their spiritual values to slaughter any animal. Government policy required surveillance through routine testing for TB, the slaughter and post-mortem examination of all cattle that tested positive, as the temple bullock had. The temple bullock’s slaughter would be considered by the community as a sacrilegious act and a very grave and serious interference with their religious rights. None the less the ministerial decision was justified under art 9(2) of the Convention as necessary because of the slaughter policy’s importance to agriculture, the prevalence of bovine TB and the reasonable expectation of farmers. The minister had been justified in refusing to permit an exception to the slaughter policy. The judge’s order quashing the slaughter notice would be quashed and the notice reinstated.

THOMAS LJ agreed and LLOYD LJ delivered a concurring judgment.

Appearances: Jonathan Crow QC and Joanne Clement (Treasury Solicitor) for the Welsh Ministers; Mark Hoskins and Maya Lester (Bindman & Partners) for the claimant.

Reported by: John Spencer, barrister