Wymiar (nie)sprawiedliwości wobec cierpienia ryb – dlaczego sprawa karpi była tak trudna do osądzenia?
Fish Suffering in the (In)Justice System: Why Was the Carp Case so Difficult to Judge?

Summary/Abstract: In this paper, the author analyzes a criminal case concerning the humane protection of carp, which lasted over a decade (2010–2023) and can be considered groundbreaking for the protection of fish and, indirectly, other animals in Poland. The case involved nine decisions by prosecutors and courts, including two rulings by the Supreme Court. The author examines why it took so long to reach “justice for fish,” what made the carp case so difficult to adjudicate, and why it provoked radically different evaluations among legal authorities. Drawing on the theory of hard cases, the author introduces the concept of a “hidden hard case” – a situation in which the judiciary, due to its entanglement in a particular socio-cultural context, struggles to correctly apply legal provisions, even though their proper interpretation is attainable using standard legal interpretative methods. One of the factors contributing to the emergence of hidden hard cases is the adjudication of cases involving animals perceived as distant or unfamiliar to humans. The author argues that identifying and addressing hidden hard cases in animal protection cases is a necessary step toward the proper application of animal protection law. At the same time, it requires incorporating hermeneutic insights on the influence of pre-understanding on legal interpretation. Finally, the article formulates interpretive directives for legal actors handling cases involving the protection of sentient animals.

• Details
• Contents