Page 151

AD ALTA

JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

and wildlife species for which keeping is forbidden for reasons
of animal welfare (2nd Livestock Regulation -
Tierhaltungsverordnung).

The importance of the discussed issue is highlighted by the fact
that in the Slovak Republic, there are efforts for a "big"
amendment to the Act on Veterinary Care. This amendment
evolves mainly from the need to increase the legal protection of
animals in the Slovak Republic. The amendment to the Act on
Veterinary Care

was prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture

and Rural Development of the Slovak Republic (hereinafter
referred to as "the Ministry"). Subsequently, following the
preparation of the own text of the amendment to the Act on
Veterinary Care, the Ministry initiated an inter-ministerial
commentary procedure

The interest of the professional public and the general public in
increasing the legal status of animals is enormous in the Slovak
Republic, which was also reflected in the number of comments
on the amendment to the Veterinary Care Act in the inter-
ministerial commentary procedure. The number of mass
comments

on the amendment to the Act on Veterinary Care in

the inter-ministerial commentary procedure is 1 and the number
of ordinary comments on the amendment to the Act on
Veterinary Care in the inter-ministerial commentary procedure is
195. The draft law has not been submitted for its approval to the
National Council of the Slovak Republic yet. What is more, the
inter-ministerial commentary procedure has not been completed
by the Ministry, and the phase of evaluation is still in the
process. In general, it is not common that the phase of
commentary procedure lasts almost three months (to this date).
On the one hand, this says about the considerable interest of the
public in the discussed issue and, on the other hand, the number
of comments raised in the inter-ministerial commentary
procedure and the fact that this draft law does not reflect the
needs of the area concerned also reflect the poor quality of the
prepared draft law.

2 En effort to increase the legal protection of animals in the
Slovak Republic

The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of the
Slovak Republic has prepared a new amendment to the Act on
Veterinary Care, as a draft law amending and supplementing Act
no. 39/2007 Coll. on Veterinary Care, as amended (hereinafter
"the draft law"). Subsequently, after the own text of the
amendment to the Act on Veterinary Care was prepared, the
Ministry initiated an inter-ministerial commentary procedure.

The draft law was prepared by the government and sets out
several fundamental tasks:

"The draft law sets out the relevant provisions on the
identification and registration of animals, specifically dogs,
in relation to the provisions on live findings of animals and
on the placement of animals in shelters and quarantine
stations. It also regulates the obligations of private
veterinarians in relation to the identification and registration
of pet animals".

“The draft law should simplify conditions and shorten the
time period after which the former owner of the abandoned
or lost animal loses the proprietary rights and the ownership
is transferred to the state."

"The draft law also deals with the situation when the
animals are involved in circus performances. Specifically,

Act amending Act no. 39/2007 Coll. on Veterinary Care, as amended, and on

amendments to certain laws.

Inter-ministerial commentary procedure – The Legislative process no. LP/2017/684

Section 14 paragraph 7 of the legislative rules of the Government of the Slovak

Republic, cit.: "The contradictory proceedings with the representative of the public
shall take place whenever the petitioner does not comply with a mass comment (with
at least 500 persons identified). If a mass comment has been applied electronically via
the portal, the list of persons who have identified with a mass comment may be sent to
the submitter in a manner other than through the portal."

Reasoning Report – general part

the draft law addresses checking the conditions and
approving the circuses."

"The draft law supplements the Civil Code in terms of the
exclusion of a live animal from the definition of a thing as
such, considering that the provisions on things will also
apply equally to the live animals unless it is contrary to their
nature."

The draft law itself not only fails to meet the stated objectives,
which are involved in the reasoning report to the draft law, but in
many cases, instead of transparent adjustments, it also brings
confusion and the possibility of a various interpretations, which
in the end will cause problems with its application in practice. At
the same time, it should be noted that the draft law itself cannot
be described as a "big" amendment to the Act on Veterinary
Care, which will provide increased legal protection of animals in
the Slovak Republic. The draft law amends and supplements
some parts of the Act on Veterinary Care, but there are no major
changes.

In view of the above, it is necessary to deal with the individual
parts of the draft law, while paying attention to the most
important changes in the Act on Veterinary Care. We evaluate
positively the idea of major changes in the new legislation,
however, the draft law itself we evaluate rather negatively.

2.1

The definitions of "holder" and "person entitled to
dispose of animals"

Generally, in term of the issues of definitions of "holder" and
"the person entitled to dispose of animals", it should be said that
this solution cannot be considered the most appropriate. Also
with regard to the regulations adopted in foreign countries, two
entities are distinguished, i.e. the owner of an animal and the
keeper of an animal. This of course also affects the relation of
responsibility for the animal. Responsibility for the animal
should be primarily placed on the owner, unless it is shown that
at the time the offense was committed, someone else was
responsible for the animal, whether by written or oral agreement,
i.e. the keeper of the animal. By defining both the concept of the
holder and, on the other, the concept of the person entitled to
dispose of animals, application problems can occur in practice.

At the same time, the intends of the Ministry to define these two
entities - the holder and the person entitled to dispose of the
animal is not obvious. We have a negative opinion on these
definitions since they will lead to practical problems in
identifying whether there is a holder or a person entitled to
dispose of animals. We also expect problems in the practice of
the state authorities since the basic assumption is to determine
the subject of law as well as whether the subject is an owner,
holder or person entitled to dispose of animals. In view of the
above, we suggest, within the proposals de lege ferrenda,
creating only two basic entities, as is preferred also by the
legislation adopted in foreign countries, namely:

1.

the owner - a person listed in the register or a person who
may be identified as the owner also in another way than by
being entered in the register, and

an entitled person - a person who can clearly prove that the
animal is in their possession or care, or a person authorized
to perform any legal acts on the basis of a proven act -
adoption agreement, lease agreement, etc.

2.2

Prohibition of performances of animals in circuses

If the aim of the new legislation is to protect animals and our
task is to eliminate the suffering of circus animals caused by
dressage, transport, and inappropriate accommodation conditions
(the three most serious problems), it would be appropriate to
adopt legislation which broadens the prohibition on animal
performances in circuses. The proposed legislation still has gaps

Reasoning Report – general part

- 151 -