-
請大家看這支鉛筆。這是一個事物,一個法律定義的物品。如同你們擁有的書本或汽車,它們都屬於法律定義的物品,你們在我後方所見的類人猿也屬於法律定義的物品。現在我可以像這樣對待一件法律定義的物品,我可以對我的書本或汽車為所欲為。你們所見的是類人猿,這些照片由一位名叫James Mollison的男子拍攝,他寫了一本名叫《James與其他猿類》的書,他在書中解釋為何每一隻猿類幾乎毫無例外都是孤兒。牠們目睹父母在眼前死去,牠們是法律定義的物品,因此幾世紀以來一直存在區分法律定義物品與法人的法律高牆。一方面,法官無視於法律定義的物品,它們不屬於法律考慮範圍,它們沒有任何法律權利,它們沒資格擁有法律權利,它們是奴隸。法律高牆的另一邊是法人,法人在法官面前是有形的,他們屬於法律考慮的範圍,他們擁有許多權利,他們擁有許多法律賦予的權利,他們是主宰。
展開英文
收合英文
-
I'd like to have you look at this pencil. It's a thing. It's a legal thing. And so are books you might have or the cars you own. They're all legal things. The great apes that you'll see behind me, they too are legal things. Now, I can do that to a legal thing. I can do whatever I want to my book or my car. These great apes, you'll see. The photographs are taken by a man named James Mollison who wrote a book called "James & Other Apes." And he tells in his book how every single one them, almost every one of them, is an orphan who saw his mother and father die before his eyes. They're legal things. So for centuries, there's been a great legal wall that separates legal things from legal persons. On one hand, legal things are invisible to judges. They don't count in law. They don't have any legal rights. They don't have the capacity for legal rights. They are the slaves. On the other side of that legal wall are the legal persons. Legal persons are very visible to judges. They count in law. They may have many rights.They have the capacity for an infinite number of rights. And they're the masters.
-
如今所有非人類動物都屬於法律定義的物品,所有人類都屬於法人,但人類與法人並非同義詞,直到今天仍是如此。人類與法人並非同義詞,一方面來說,幾世紀以來,許多人類屬於法律定義的物品。奴隸屬於法律定義的物品,有時女性與兒童也屬於法律定義的物品。確實,過去幾世紀以來,許多關於公民權的爭論已在那道法律高牆上鑿出一個洞,並開始將關於人權的爭論送入高牆,爭取使法律定義的物品成為法人。但該死的,那個洞已被補上。現在,另一側是法人,但法人並非僅限於人類。例如,許多法人甚至沒有生命。在美國,我們知道企業集團屬於法人,印度獨立之前,有法官堅持印度崇拜的偶像屬於法人,清真寺也屬於法人。2000年,印度最高法院裁定錫克教的聖經屬於法人,就在不久前的2012年,紐西蘭王室與原住民簽訂條約,達成河流屬於法人、且擁有河床歸屬權的協議。1980年,我閱讀Peter Singer的著作,當時我還擁有一頭濃密的棕髮。我深受書中內容感動,因為我成為律師的目的就是替弱勢群體發聲、捍衛無權無勢者。但我不曾意識到眾多非人類動物是多麼弱勢及無助,因此我開始成為保護動物權利的律師。1985年,我意識到自己正在嘗試達成一件不可能的任務,原因在於我所有的客戶、所有我試圖捍衛牠們權利的動物都屬於法律定義的物品,不在法律考慮的範圍內。這根本行不通,因此我決定唯一行得通的方法是,使所有動物、至少某些動物也能通過法律高牆上那個我們再次鑿開的洞,並開始將非人類動物送入那個洞,進入屬於法人的那一側。
展開英文
收合英文
-
Right now, all nonhuman animals are legal things. All human beings are legal persons. But being human and being a legal person has never been, and is not today, synonymous with a legal person. Humans and legal persons are not synonymous. On the one side, there have been many human beings over the centuries who have been legal things. Slaves were legal things. Women, children, were sometimes legal things. Indeed, a great deal of civil rights struggle over the last centuries has been to punch a hole through that wall and begin to feed these human things through the wall and have them become legal persons. But alas, that hole has closed up. Now, on the other side are legal persons, but they've never only been limited to human beings. There are, for example, there are many legal persons who are not even alive. In the United States, we're aware of the fact that corporations are legal persons. In pre-independence India, a court held that a Hindu idol was a legal person, that a mosque was a legal person. In 2000, the Indian Supreme Court held that the holy books of the Sikh religion was a legal person, and in 2012, just recently, there was a treaty between the indigenous peoples of New Zealand and the crown, in which it was agreed that a river was a legal person who owned its own riverbed. Now, I read Peter Singer's book in 1980, when I had a full head of lush, brown hair, and indeed I was moved by it, because I had become a lawyer because I wanted to speak for the voiceless, defend the defenseless, and I'd never realized how voiceless and defenseless the trillions, billions of nonhuman animals are. And I began to work as an animal protection lawyer. And by 1985, I realized that I was trying to accomplish something that was literally impossible, the reason being that all of my clients, all the animals whose interests I was trying to defend, were legal things; they were invisible. It was not going to work, so I decided that the only thing that was going to work was they had, at least some of them, had to also be moved through a hole that we could open up again in that wall and begin feeding the appropriate nonhuman animals through that hole onto the other side of being legal persons.
-
當時極少人真正瞭解或聽說過動物權利,以及非人類動物法律人格或合法權利的概念,因此我知道這是一條漫長的道路。因此在1985年,我認為或許得花上30年光陰才能發起一場策略性訴訟和長期宣傳活動,以便在法律高牆上鑿出另一個洞。事實證明我過於悲觀,我只花了28年。因此為了展開這個計畫,我們必須做的不只是撰寫法律評論文章、藉由教學或著作宣導,我們必須開始擬定如何進行這類訴訟的具體細節,因此首要之務就是找出訴訟理由,合法的訴訟理由。合法的訴訟理由是律師在法庭上提出論點的工具,事實上有個相當有趣的案例發生在距今約250年前的倫敦:Somerset對Stewart案。當時一名黑人奴隸藉由法律系統使自己從法律定義的物品變成法人。我對這個案例十分感興趣,甚至為此寫了一本書。
展開英文
收合英文
-
Now, at that time, there was very little known about or spoken about truly animal rights, about the idea of having legal personhood or legal rights for a nonhuman animal, and I knew it was going to take a long time. And so, in 1985, I figured that it would take about 30 years before we'd be able to even begin a strategic litigation, long-term campaign, in order to be able to punch another hole through that wall. It turned out that I was pessimistic, that it only took 28. So what we had to do in order to begin was not only to write law review articles and teach classes, write books, but we had to then begin to get down to the nuts and bolts of how you litigate that kind of case. So one of the first things we needed to do was figure out what a cause of action was, a legal cause of action. And a legal cause of action is a vehicle that lawyers use to put their arguments in front of courts. It turns out there's a very interesting case that had occurred almost 250 years ago in London called Somerset vs. Stewart, whereby a black slave had used the legal system and had moved from a legal thing to a legal person. I was so interested in it that I eventually wrote an entire book about it.
-
James Somerset在西非被綁架時年僅八歲,他熬過從非洲西岸到加勒比海的航程,他被賣給一位在維吉尼亞州經商的蘇格蘭商人Charles Stewart。20年後,Stewart將James Somerset帶往倫敦,抵達倫敦後,James決定逃跑,因此他做的第一件事就是受洗,因為他想擁有教父和教母,因為對18世紀的奴隸而言,他們知道教父的主要責任之一就是幫助他們逃跑。因此在1771年秋天,James Somerset與Charles Stewart起了爭執,我們無法得知詳細情形,但之後James就不見人影。震怒的Charles Stewart雇用追捕脫逃奴隸的人搜遍整個倫敦,找到他之後並未送回Charles Stewart身邊,而是帶到一艘停在倫敦港、名叫「安與瑪麗」的船上。James被鎖在甲板上,這艘船預定開往牙買加。James將在奴隸市場出售,注定在牙買加被奴役三至五年,從事採收蔗糖的工作。
展開英文
收合英文
-
James Somerset was an eight-year-old boy when he was kidnapped from West Africa. He survived the Middle Passage, and he was sold to a Scottish businessman named Charles Stewart in Virginia. Now, 20 years later, Stewart brought James Somerset to London, and after he got there, James decided he was going to escape. And so one of the first things he did was to get himself baptized, because he wanted to get a set of godparents, because to an 18th-century slave, they knew that one of the major responsibilities of godfathers was to help you escape. And so in the fall of 1771, James Somerset had a confrontation with Charles Stewart. We don't know exactly what happened, but then James dropped out of sight. An enraged Charles Stewart then hired slave catchers to canvass the city of London, find him, bring him not back to Charles Stewart, but to a ship, the Ann and Mary, that was floating in London Harbour, and he was chained to the deck, and the ship was to set sail for Jamaica where James was to be sold in the slave markets and be doomed to the three to five years of life that a slave hadharvesting sugar cane in Jamaica.
-
James的教父和教母開始採取行動,他們接觸倫敦最有權力的法官Mansfield爵士,他是王座法庭首席法官。他們請求Mansfield爵士依普通法頒佈James Somerset的人身保護令,普通法是指英美地區的法官可在憲法章程外行使的法律。人身保護令又稱為Great Writ(大令狀),大寫G,大寫W,旨在保護任何在違反本身意願的情況下遭拘留的人。一旦人身保護令發佈,拘留者必須移交被拘留者,並提出剝奪其人身自由的合法理由。Mansfield爵士必須立刻做出裁定,因為如果James Somerset屬於法律定義的物品,他將沒有資格獲得人身保護令,除非他屬於法人。因此Mansfield爵士決定他應該假設、而非裁定James Somerset確實屬於法人。他發佈人身保護令,船長交出James,接下來六個月舉辦了一系列聽證會。1772年6月22日,Mansfield爵士表示奴隸制度太過醜惡,他使用「醜惡」這個字眼,普通法不會支持這個制度,於是他下令釋放James。此刻James Somerset經歷了一次法律的轉變,這位走出法庭的自由人看起來與之前走進法庭的奴隸完全相同,但以法律層面來說,他們沒有任何共同點。
展開英文
收合英文
-
Well now James' godparents swung into action. They approached the most powerful judge, Lord Mansfield, who was chief judge of the court of King's Bench, and they demanded that he issue a common law writ of habeus corpus on behalf of James Somerset. Now, the common law is the kind of law that English-speaking judges can make when they're not cabined in by statutes or constitutions, and a writ of habeus corpus is called the Great Writ, capital G, capital W, and it's meant to protect any of us who are detained against our will. A writ of habeus corpus is issued. The detainer is required to bring the detainee in and give a legally sufficient reason for depriving him of his bodily liberty. Well, Lord Mansfield had to make a decision right off the bat, because if James Somerset was a legal thing, he was not eligible for a writ of habeus corpus, only if he could be a legal person. So Lord Mansfield decided that he would assume, without deciding, that James Somerset was indeed a legal person, and he issued the writ of habeus corpus, and James's body was brought in by the captain of the ship. There were a series of hearings over the next six months. On June 22, 1772, Lord Mansfield said that slavery was so odious, and he used the word "odious," that the common law would not support it, and he ordered James free. At that moment, James Somerset underwent a legal transubstantiation. The free man who walked out of the courtroom looked exactly like the slave who had walked in, but as far as the law was concerned, they had nothing whatsoever in common.
-
接下來我們進行的是「非人類權力計畫」,我是這個組織的創始人,然後開始研究我們想在法官面前呈現何種價值觀和原則。哪些是他們與生俱來的價值觀和原則?哪些是法學院傳授的價值觀和原則?他們每天都會使用嗎?他們打心底相信嗎?我們選擇了自由和平等。現在,自由權是你享有的權利之一,取決於你如何運用它。基本自由權保護了基本權益,普通法的最高權益就是自主權與自決權,因此它們在普通法國家的力量相當強大。如果你進了醫院,拒絕接受延續生命的治療,法官不會強迫你接受治療,因為他們會尊重你的自決權和自主權。現在,你享有的其中一種權力是平等權,因為相對來說,你與其他人相同,如果彼此發生摩擦,如果是這樣,因為他們擁有權利,你跟他們一樣,你也擁有相同權利。法院和立法機關習慣界定權利範圍,有些包括在內,有些排除在外,但你必須,至少必須-那條界線必須合理合法。「非人類權利計畫」認為界定權利範圍束縛了擁有自主權與自決權的個體,如你們在我後方所看到的,這侵犯了平等權。
展開英文
收合英文
-
The next thing we did is that the Nonhuman Rights Project, which I founded, then began to look at what kind of values and principles do we want to put before the judges? What values and principles did they imbibe with their mother's milk, were they taught in law school, do they use every day, do they believe with all their hearts -- and we chose liberty and equality. Now, liberty right is the kind of right to which you're entitled because of how you're put together, and a fundamental liberty right protects a fundamental interest. And the supreme interest in the common law are the rights to autonomy and self-determination. So they are so powerful that in a common law country, if you go to a hospital and you refuse life-saving medical treatment, a judge will not order it forced upon you, because they will respect your self-determination and your autonomy. Now, an equality right is the kind of right to which you're entitled because you resemble someone else in a relevant way, and there's the rub, relevant way. So if you are that, then because they have the right, you're like them, you're entitled to the right. Now, courts and legislatures draw lines all the time. Some are included, some are excluded. But you have to, at the bare minimum you must -- that line has to be a reasonable means to a legitimate end. The Nonhuman Rights Project argues that drawing a line in order to enslave an autonomous and self-determining being like you're seeing behind me, that that's a violation of equality.
-
然後我們搜尋了80個管轄區,我們花了七年時間才找到這個管轄區,我們想在那裡提出第一項訴訟。我們選擇了紐約州,然後我們決定該用誰作為原告,我們選擇了黑猩猩。不僅因為珍.古德是我們的董事會成員,也因為珍與其他人數十年來不遺餘力地研究黑猩猩。我們知道牠們擁有傑出的認知能力,類似人類擁有的認知能力,因此我們選擇黑猩猩,並開始在全世界尋找黑猩猩認知研究專家。我們在日本、瑞典、德國、蘇格蘭、英國和美國找到這些專家,他們共同撰寫了長達100頁的證詞,其中列出40多種方法,闡述黑猩猩複雜的認知能力。無論單獨或整體看來,牠們都有資格獲得自主權與自決權,這些能力包括-例如牠們擁有自我意識,也能意識到自己擁有自我意識。牠們知道自己擁有思想,牠們知道其他黑猩猩也擁有思想。牠們知道自己是個體,能夠生存。牠們知道自己昨天活著,明天也將活著。牠們會進行心理上的時間旅行,牠們記得昨天發生的事,牠們會期待明天,這就是為何囚禁黑猩猩是殘忍的行為,尤其是單獨囚禁,這是我們對待罪大惡極犯人的方法,我們卻不加思索地這麼對待黑猩猩。
展開英文
收合英文
-
We then searched through 80 jurisdictions, it took us seven years, to find the jurisdiction where we wanted to begin filing our first suit. We chose the state of New York. Then we decided upon who our plaintiffs are going to be. We decided upon chimpanzees, not just because Jane Goodall was on our board of directors, but because they, Jane and others, have studied chimpanzees intensively for decades. We know the extraordinary cognitive capabilities that they have, and they also resemble the kind that human beings have. And so we chose chimpanzees, and we began to then canvass the world to find the experts in chimpanzee cognition. We found them in Japan, Sweden, Germany, Scotland, England and the United States, and amongst them, they wrote 100 pages of affidavits in which they set out more than 40 ways in which their complex cognitive capability, either individually or together, all added up to autonomy and self-determination. Now, these included, for example, that they were conscious. But they're also conscious that they're conscious. They know they have a mind. They know that others have minds. They know they're individuals, and that they can live. They understand that they lived yesterday and they will live tomorrow. They engage in mental time travel. They remember what happened yesterday. They can anticipate tomorrow, which is why it's so terrible to imprison a chimpanzee, especially alone. It's the thing that we do to our worst criminals, and we do that to chimpanzees without even thinking about it.
-
牠們擁有某種道德意識,當牠們和人類玩經濟遊戲時,會自動提出公平的條件,即使牠們不需要這麼做。牠們擁有計算能力,牠們能理解數字,牠們能進行簡單的數學計算,牠們能使用語言-或避開語言爭論,牠們會參與目的性與指示性交流,並注意談話對象的態度。牠們擁有文化,牠們擁有物質文化、社會文化,牠們擁有象徵性文化。科學家在象牙海岸的塔伊森林發現黑猩猩正用石頭敲開相當堅硬的果殼,這得花很長時間學習。對該地區進行挖掘後,科學家發現這種物質文化,這種操作方式。這些石頭已傳承了至少4300年,經歷225代黑猩猩。因此現在我們需要找到我們的黑猩猩。首先我們在紐約州找到兩隻,兩隻都在我們提出訴訟前過世,然後我們找到Tommy。Tommy是一隻黑猩猩,你們可以在我身後的圖片上看見。Tommy是一隻黑猩猩,我們在那個籠子裡發現牠,我們在一個裝滿籠子的小房間裡發現牠,房間位於紐約中部一座廢棄拖車停車場的大倉庫中。我們找到Kiko,牠的聽力部分受損,Kiko當時在麻州西部一間水泥鋪後方。我們找到Hercules和Leo,牠們是兩隻年輕的雄性黑猩猩,當時在石溪接受生物醫療解剖研究,我們發現了牠們。
展開英文
收合英文
-
They have some kind of moral capacity. When they play economic games with human beings, they'll spontaneously make fair offers, even when they're not required to do so. They are numerate. They understand numbers. They can do some simple math. They can engage in language -- or to stay out of the language wars, they're involved in intentional and referential communication in which they pay attention to the attitudes of those with whom they are speaking. They have culture. They have a material culture, a social culture. They have a symbolic culture. Scientists in the Taï Forests in the Ivory Coast found chimpanzees who were using these rocks to smash open the incredibly hard hulls of nuts. It takes a long time to learn how to do that, and they excavated the area and they found that this material culture, this way of doing it, these rocks, had passed down for at least 4,300 years through 225 chimpanzee generations. So now we needed to find our chimpanzee. Our chimpanzee, first we found two of them in the state of New York. Both of them would die before we could even get our suits filed. Then we found Tommy. Tommy is a chimpanzee. You see him behind me. Tommy was a chimpanzee. We found him in that cage. We found him in a small room that was filled with cages in a larger warehouse structure on a used trailer lot in central New York. We found Kiko, who is partially deaf. Kiko was in the back of a cement storefront in western Massachusetts.And we found Hercules and Leo. They're two young male chimpanzees who are being used for biomedical, anatomical research at Stony Brook. We found them.
-
因此在2013年12月最後一週,「非人類權力計畫」在紐約州提起三項訴訟,使用與James Somerset案相同的普通法申請人身保護令。我們要求法官發佈相同的普通法人身保護令,我們希望這些黑猩猩被釋放,我們希望牠們能被送到「拯救黑猩猩」保護園區,這是位於南佛羅里達的大型黑猩猩避難所,裡面有一座人工湖,湖中有12至13座小島,每座島嶼居住24隻黑猩猩,面積為2至3英畝。這些黑猩猩將過著正常的黑猩猩生活,與其他黑猩猩在盡可能符合非洲的環境裡共同生活。現在所有案件仍持續進行中,我們還沒遇上我們的Mansfield爵士。我們會的,一定會。這是一場長期策略性訴訟戰爭,我們一定會獲勝。引用邱吉爾的話:我們並非將這些案件視為終點,它們甚至不是終點的開端,但它們也許是開端的終點,謝謝。(掌聲)
展開英文
收合英文
-
And so on the last week of December 2013, the Nonhuman Rights Project filed three suits all across the state of New York using the same common law writ of habeus corpus argument that had been used with James Somerset, and we demanded that the judges issue these common law writs of habeus corpus. We wanted the chimpanzees out, and we wanted them brought to Save the Chimps, a tremendous chimpanzee sanctuary in South Florida which involves an artificial lake with 12 or 13 islands -- there are two or three acres where two dozen chimpanzees live on each of them. And these chimpanzees would then live the life of a chimpanzee, with other chimpanzees in an environment that was as close to Africa as possible. Now, all these cases are still going on. We have not yet run into our Lord Mansfield. We shall. We shall. This is a long-term strategic litigation campaign. We shall. And to quote Winston Churchill, the way we view our cases is that they're not the end, they're not even the beginning of the end, but they are perhaps the end of the beginning. Thank you.