On animals, and their right to be heard.

Pablo Escobar was a notorious drug lord. His private estate in Colombia, Hacienda Nápoles,¹ included a zoo with 4 hippopotamuses. After he was shot and killed by the Columbian police in 1993, the property was neglected.

The hippos escaped, became feral, and multiplied. There are now between 65 and 80 hippos roaming the region. There have been incidents between hippos and humans, and reported injuries. Some scientists say that the number of hippos could go up to 1,500 by 2035 if nothing is done.²

They say that some hippos need to be killed.

Others disagree. In the US, the Animal Legal Defense Fund has obtained an order granting the hippos "interested persons" status, so that 2 wildlife experts in sterilisation can give evidence.

This sounds a little unintuitive. Are animals people, as the headline below suggests?

Unfortunately, the headline is a little click-baity. We can argue until the cows come home on whether animals should be treated the same as humans, and what rights they have or should be granted. But as a matter of legal logic, there can be no issue with non-humans being granted the right to be represented in Court, or have evidence given on their behalf.

For example, a company is not a person. Yet there is no issue with the company bringing or defending a claim in Court, or having evidence adduced on its behalf.³ A human actor makes decisions on its behalf, and in it best interests.

So why shouldn't the hippos be denied the opportunity to have a human advocate speak up in their best interests?

There's therefore really no need to get tied up in legal semantics. I wish the hippos the best.