The protection of the environment and animals enters the Constitution. The yes of the House

Final go-ahead of the Chamber of Deputiesi to the reform of articles 9 and 41 of the Constitution, a great victory for the Environment and Animals in Italy. The Chamber approved the constitutional law proposal that modifies two articles of the Constitution (9 and 41) to make room, among the fundamental principles, the protection of the environment, biodiversity, ecosystems and animals.

A two-thirds majority of MPs said yes

With a majority of two thirds, 468 votes in favor, 1 against and 6 abstentions, the Constitutional bill strongly supported in particular by and by the parliamentarians De Petris, Maiorino, Perilli, Corneli, Giammanco, Brambilla, Sarli, Muroni, Nugnes. Thanks to this reform, animals are fully included in the Constitution, appearing in articles 9 (subject to particular protection) and 41 (relating to private economic initiative) four times: as animals, as environment, as biodiversity, and as ecosystems , in the part of the fundamental principles of the Republic, and with an explicit reference to the Laws of the State that will have to implement them.

A conquest of civilization

A highly anticipated reform that, the associations hope, will be the right starting point for obtaining more protection and more respect for animals and nature. “24 years have passed since the first proposal we presented for the inclusion of animals in the Constitution, paving the way that would lead us to the great conquest of civilization obtained today, with the recognition of Animals and the Environment in the Basic Law of the State – he comments Gianluca Felicetti, President of the Italian Antivivisection League. – In addition to constituting the due recognition of a by now widespread and deep-rooted sensitivity matured by Italians over the decades, the inclusion of animals in the Constitution – we are the fifth country in the world to do so – represents a milestone, and a concrete tool, for progress in their effective protection, at the legislative and judicial level. We would certainly have wanted more – concludes Felicetti – but, even given the current political conditions, we already consider it a miracle that the new forecasts do not apply only to dogs and cats, as requested by the League, but to all animals, in full consistency with the antispecist principle that has always moved our work “.

“An extra gear towards a better world – is the comment of the president ofOipa, Massimo Comparotto. – Establish in the Constitution that the Republic “protects the environment, biodiversity and ecosystems, also in the interest of future generations” and that “the law of the State governs the ways and forms of animal protection” is a sign of maturity and legal conscience. In the part concerning animals, it is a reform in line with the Lisbon Treaty of 2007, which recognizes them as “sentient beings”“.

The satisfaction of the associations, on the other hand, also underlines the adaptation of Italy on these issues to the directives of other important countries in the world. “This is an important step that establishes an authoritative cornerstone to better protect animals in Italy and which is in addition to the European recognition of animals such as sentient beingsunderlining how the sensitivity of the company on these issues is constantly growing – comments instead Martina Pluda, director of HSI Italy – After Switzerland, Austria, Germany and India, Italy is the fifth country in the world to have included animal protection in its constitution. We thank all those, from associations to political representatives, who have spent their time in obtaining this victory of civilization ».

Who said no

The reform passed with a large majority, which saw them being left alone Brothers of Italy, but it was not an easy path. It was mainly the League of Matteo Salvini to express their opposition with a rain of amendments: 246 thousand, precisely, the changes requested to the bill by the Northern League with the aim of preventing the entry of animals into the Constitution. Indeed, the League would have liked to “reasonably differentiate the types of animals, distinguishing between those of affection, wild, farmed or dangerous ones”. The declared intent was to protect the interests of those who work with livestock and those who use wildlife for different purposes.