Recent news of a second incident involving the animals that are being kept illegally at Montekristo Estates left Malta shocked.

Not only because, once again, it was a child paying the price, but also because authorities have taken little to no action to rectify a state of affairs that has been blatantly declared illegal by the authorities themselves.

Since the first incident last November, which saw a five-year-old getting mauled by a tiger, the public was assured that the illegal zoo had closed its doors to visitors. And yet, mere months later, we get a repeat.

The public is, rightfully, incensed. The authorities’ failure to act and definitively close down the place is, at best, tantamount to negligence. At worst, it makes the government complicit in the illegality. The authorities have been taken to task on the issue numerous times. When bluntly quizzed by the media about why the animals have not been confiscated, the Prime Minister’s reply was somewhat disingenuous: the animals have not been removed from Montekristo because if they were, they would need to be put down.

A reply that comes across as a sop to our sensibilities, a rather transparent attempt by the Prime Minister to ingratiate himself with voters who support animal rights.

This facile brushing off of responsibilities is, of course, unacceptable. The Montekristo situation itself is not unique to Malta. Illegal zoos are a dismayingly common problem that various European governments have had to face. Invariably, the reaction is never a helpless shrug, or an “it’s either there or the abattoir”.

On the contrary, in a day and age when conservation efforts and animal welfare are both considered priorities on the international forum, the options are considerably wider than that.

The international community nowadays takes a very dim view of entrepreneurs who keep exotic animals in conditions that don’t meet legal requirements. Rescue operations regularly hit the headlines and, because a solution was needed to be found to a growing problem, a number of rescue centres and wildlife parks now host animals that are rescued from illegal zoos and circuses.

Of course, rehoming these animals costs money. A substantial amount of money that, many will argue, should not be imposed as a burden on the tax-payer. It is difficult to disagree with such sentiments. After all, the man in the street should not be made to bear financial responsibility for the illegal activities of someone else.

However, the solution stares the authorities right in the face. Under environmental law, we have seen that the ‘polluter pays’ principle has turned out to be very effective. There is no reason why this principle should not be applied even in this instance.

To put it in simpler terms, it should be the person/entity that brought these animals to Malta in the first place that bears financial responsibility for their rehoming.

It is clear that the current state of affairs at Montekristo cannot be allowed to subsist. Tweeting a condemnation is not enough.

It is to be hoped that the government doesn’t wait for a third incident, before doing the sensible thing.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.