Ritual slaughter without stunning is practiced by Jewish and Muslim communities in the EU but continues to be a sensitive issue as it involves principles of religious freedom and animal welfare concerns.
As previously reported, the European Commission organized recently a conference in Brussels with religious communities in the EU with focus on ritual slaughter. The idea behind the event was to foster an open, frank and constructive discussion between the religious communities and the national authorities.
According to current EU regulation, member states have freedom of discretion to allow ritual slaughter without stunning if it takes place in approved slaughterhouses. According to a controversial ruling in December 2020 by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) they can also apply stricter animal welfare concerns and ban ritual slaughter without stunning.
While the conference highlighted good practice in EU member states where ritual slaughter without stunning is allowed, it disappointed the religious communities. The Commission has no intention to amend the regulation in its upcoming reform of animal welfare legislation in the EU and close the loophole in the regulation after the interpretation by the European Court of Justice.
“It was important that the European Commission stated that ritual slaughter is an important issue for the religious communities and agreed to organise a conference on the topic,” Rabbi Menachem Margolin, chairperson of European Jewish Association, told The Brussels Times after the conference. “But in practice, there was no concrete outcome of the conference.”
“The Commission is more vocal than the member states on this issue and opposes populistic politicians in the member states who want to forbid ritual slaughter. In Judaism, stunning is forbidden because it causes pain and distress to the animals. We cooperate with the Muslim community which shares our opinion that ritual slaughter without stunning must be protected.”
Animal welfare organisations not invited
The issue of animal welfare and the use of alternative slaughter methods was supposed to be discussed at the conference but neither animal welfare organisations nor the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) attended it.
“At a time when the European Commission is reviewing the entire animal welfare acquis – including on slaughter – it seems almost perverse to co-host a conference, behind closed doors, with only one section of civil society represented,” commented Reineke Hameleers, CEO of Eurogroup for Animals.
"Religious slaughter is a sensitive topic and it has divided opinions for far too long,” she said. “We need more dialogue, not less. Greater transparency, not less. Instead, the organisers chose to exclude animal protection groups, interested parliamentarians and veterinarians. What should have been a conference became an echo chamber.”
Eurogroup for Animals asked to attend. “We wrote to the organisers and received no response. We tried registering on the webpage, and were told it was full.” The Commission told The Brussels Times that it defends animal welfare and understand the concerns of the animal welfare associations.
Eurogroup for Animals referred to the ECJ decision in 2020 as a good starting point for a discussion on the topic. “The judges believed that reversible stunning finally reconciles freedom of religion on one hand and the societal value of animal welfare on the other.”
In May 2021, the NGO published a position paper on slaughter without stunning where it calls for a repeal of the derogation to mandatory stunning in ritual slaughter. According to the paper, no derogation should be in place either for slaughter according to religious rites or for any other kinds of slaughter (e.g., domestic slaughter).
More research needed on reversible stunning
That said, Eurogroup for Animals writes that there is no workable reversible stunning method in place and proposes that resources should be allocated to validate humane reversible stunning methods for all relevant species. Contrary to Jewish communities, some Muslim religious communities in some countries accept stunning or reversible stunning.
None of the current stunning methods in use (captive bolt stunning, electrical stunning and gas stunning) are without pain, fear and distress for the animals. Some hazards are inherent to the stunning method and cannot be avoided. The methods are not reversible if handled inadequately by unskilled staff and will in some cases kill the animal or risk causing permanent injury or defects before the cut.
“High concentration of CO2 stunning is highly aversive for pigs,” says Eurogroup for Animals. “Gas can also take some time to act, potentially leading to suffering before reaching unconsciousness. Electrical stunning is quicker, but the handling of animals prior to the stunning can be quite challenging, stressful and painful for the animals.”
Water bath stunning is a questionable stunning method used for poultry despite its animal welfare disadvantages.
The use of carbon dioxide cannot be rejected at present as there is no commercially viable alternative for certain species like pig or fur animals, according to EFSA. The EU agency provides scientific advice on welfare of animals, by assessing factors such as housing, transport and slaughter of farmed animals.
The EU legislation on the killing of farmed animals aims to minimise the pain and suffering of animals through the use of properly approved stunning methods. In fact, EFSA's reports on the welfare of different animal species (for pigs, cattle, sheep, goats and poultry) during the slaughter process is difficult reading with shocking pictures from especially pig slaughterhouses.
EU has put into place legislation to ensure that animal welfare conditions are respected but the breaches of its regulations in the pig meat sector are still largely overlooked and has been allowed to continue for years. The Commission is aware that current stunning methods in the pig sector are not perfect but says that alternatives also have animal welfare issues.
Slaughter without stunning is dealt with by EFSA in a report from 2020 on welfare of cattle at slaughter. The crucial issue is the onset of unconsciousness and the time of bleeding out after the cut.
What worries animal welfare organisations besides slaughter (with and without stunning) are also factory farming, which is described as the major cause of animal suffering and green-house-gas emissions, caging of animals, conditions in slaughter houses, live animal transports, and farming of animals for furs. The European Commission has a full agenda to deal with.
M. Apelblat
The Brussels Times
