/ 24 July 2003

Tuli Elephant abusers to be sentenced next week

The abusers of 30 elephants brought from the Tuli block in Botswana in 1998 will be sentenced in the Pretoria Regional Court on Tuesday.

The owners of the elephants, Riccardo Ghiazza and his company African Game Properties, were convicted in April of contravening the Animals Protection Act by doing nothing to stop the ill-treatment of the elephants.

Student handler, Wayne Stockigt, was found guilty of cruelly beating the animals on two occasions.

Contraventions of the act are punishable by the imposition of a fine or maximum imprisonment of 12 months.

In final argument before sentencing, state prosecutor Johann Kok, told the court on Thursday the object of the act was to prevent animals being treated in a way that would offend the finer sensibilities of society. The only sure way of punishment was of making use of the powers in the act.

He, however, told the court this was not a case where direct imprisonment should be considered. Imprisonment was not the only means of punishment. The offence committed was part of a goal of financial gain.

Should a fine be imposed, it should be high enough to be considered punishment and to make others think seriously before doing the same, he submitted. Kok also suggested that the court make an order declaring Ghiazza and his company unfit to own or be in charge of elephants for a certain time.

Defence counsel, Alan Trusler, however, argued that the purchase, training and sale of elephants were the livelihood of Ghiazza and his company.

Their contraventions of the act had resulted from a lack of knowledge about the training and taming of elephants.

Ghiazza and the company had since dealt with various wild animals, including elephants, with no problems. No further charges had been brought by the National Council of the Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and it had often visited the facility.

Lessons had been learnt from the Tuli elephant case and it was unlikely a similar situation would occur, Trusler told the court.

Regarding Stockigt, Trusler submitted that in months spent with the elephants the student handler had been convicted of cruelly beating them on only two occasions. While elephants were dangerous animals and hitting them with a stick was justified, he had exceeded the reasonable bounds.

At the time, though, he was being taught to handle the animals by the Indonesian mahouts hired to train them and might have picked up their bad habits. It might also have been that he was just having a bad day.

Stockigt’s blameworthiness was a lot less than that of the mahouts. He did not deserve imprisonment. He did not earn a big salary, Trusler told the court. – Sapa