Vem talar för djuren? Utredning av talerätt för djurskyddsorganisationer i fråga om etiska godkännanden av djurförsök

Sammanfattning: The Swedish Animal Welfare Act states that animals have a number of different interests and needs that must be protected. At the same time, animals are legally categorized as objects and, as a result, cannot stand as a legal party and have their interests represented in legal proceedings. This entails difficulties in ensuring compliance with the Animal Welfare Act. One possible solution, which has been raised by animal rights advocates, is to grant animal welfare organizations the right to appeal legal decisions on behalf of animals. This possibility has in particular been discussed in relation to the animal ethics committees' (AECs) ethical approvals of animal experiments. This essay examines current law regarding the right to appeal the AECs' decisions. The occurrence of such a right is decided on the basis of a very general regulation in the Swedish Administrative Procedure Act, legislative history and practice are therefore important in order to ascertain an answer to the question of organizations’ right to appeal. Many key actors, including the National Animal Ethics Committee (NAEC), which is the final instance in this context, share the view that animal welfare organizations do not have the right to appeal. However, the question has not been subject to judicial review and the essay depicts uncertainties in current law that provide support for the opposite conclusion. The essay also discusses relevant reasons for and against explicitly granting animal welfare organizations the right to appeal. Especially the need for a control system due to extensive criticism that has been directed at the AECs’ ethical review is highlighted. Parallels to environmental organizations’ right to appeal within environmental law are also drawn. The conclusions are that current law regarding animal welfare organizations' right to appeal is unclear and that the legislator should explicitly regulate the issue for reasons of legal certainty. Furthermore, it is argued that such organizations should be granted the right to appeal ethical approvals.