Sport hunting and the protection of the natural environment and the wild life

Constitutionality review as per a citizen request (Laura Juliana Santacoloma Méndez) of the Act 84 of 1989 and the Presidential Decree 2811 of 1974

Date:  02/06/2019

Judge-Rapporteur:  Antonio José Lizarazo Ocampo

Concurrence:  Carlos Libardo Bernal Pulido. Diana Constanza Fajardo Rivera.  Alejandro Linares Cantillo.  Antonio José Lizarazo Ocampo. Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado.  José Fernando Reyes Cuartas.  Alberto Rojas Ríos

Dissent:  Luis Guillermo Guerrero Pérez.  Cristina Pardo Schlesinger

The reviewed provisions.  The Act adopted the National Statute for the Protection of Animals. The Decree, on the other hand, approved the National Code of Natural and Renewable Resources and Environmental Protection.  The articles in question authorize sport hunting under certain circumstances.

The plaintiff´s arguments.  The plaintiff stated that the challenged provisions infringe the constitutional tenets that prohibit animal abuse as a component of the protection of the environment. Sport hunting is, in his opinion, a form of such abuse.

Issue: Do sport hunting ignore constitutional principles regarding wildlife protection?

Ruling and reasoning.  Yes.  The Court concluded that the regulations go against the constitutional duty to protect the natural environment and the wildlife.  According to that duty, it is of the highest public interest to protect animals against all kinds of suffering, mistreatment, and cruelty. 

Consequently, the Court declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL the accused regulations, to the extent that they allowed sport hunting with no protection for the animals.  It also declared the CONDITIONAL CONSTITUTIONALITY of article 8 of Law 84 of 1989, under the understanding that sport hunting does not constitute an exception to the provisions of the law that expressly protect animal life.