Loro Parque to appeal sentence which rules in its favour against PETA accusation

[Janet]

It sounds counter-intuitive, but Loro Parque is to appeal a judgment which found in its favour against animal rights organization PETA. In 2016 Loro Parque took legal action against the activist group for accusations it made to Seprona (Guardia Civil Environmental Unit) for alleged mistreatment of its orcas. Loro Parque says that PETA not only made the denuncia to the police but also started an international press campaign against the park, even though "the previous investigations of Seprona confirmed that there were absolutely no indications of mistreatment and that the orcas were in optimal conditions".

Now, a sentence published yesterday has ruled that "the installations of the orcas at Loro Parque fulfill the regulations in force and the general condition of the orcas is the correct one".  It also states that "is unquestionable that the activity developed at Loro Parque complies strictly to the applicable legal requirements and counts with the obligatory authorizations and licenses" and accepts that it has been verified that "the zoological park has qualified personnel to take care of and medically treat the orcas that live in its installations".

So why is Loro Parque appealing the judgment? The park says that although the judicial resolution never once questions the wellbeing of the orcas in Loro Parque, and indeed makes it clear that the orcas are in good conditions, attended by qualified professionals and experts, the sentence explicitly accepts that PETA has freedom of speech rights protected by legislation. The court noted that although the accusations were demonstrated to be false, the right to free speech also has to be protected in a democratic society.

Loro Parque's response is that it is also necessary "to protect the legal and legitimate economic activities which are the motor of our society, and will therefore appeal this sentence to the High Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife in order to address the legal argument that the legitimate use of freedom of speech cannot be the excuse for organizing defamation campaigns against organizations like Loro Parque, which has been involved in Nature conservation and animal wellbeing work for 45 years".

[Addick]

Any time I hear or read of PETA (or the RSPCA) I wonder to myself who it is they are suing this time.  They give the impression that they are more concerned with the number of people and organisations they can take to court, rather than the actual welfare of the animals they claim to be there for. 

[Marion]

They're not really interested in the welfare of the animals. They want to kill all animals in captivity.

[Myrtle Hogan-Lance]

And I believe it is PETA supporters who go around releasing animals from captivity, only to lead to their deaths.

I don't support Loro Parque in trying to shut down freedom of speech.  I'm afraid it has to go through the route, and be proved to be false, and fair procedures have to be seen to be followed.  Otherwise, you could not criticise the oil or automotive industries, Big Pharma or a host of other powerful organisations. 

If Loro Parque wants to win, they need to show what scum PETA is. 

[Janet]

well if a court says someone's not a thief and then someone else goes around saying the defendant is too a thief ... that's not "using free speech" but "slander". And slander is not legal.

And that's what is happening here. LP isn't trying to shut down "free speech", but "slander" where PETA is accusing it of things that a court has already clearly judged are not true.

Like all rights, it seems to me, the right to free speech needs to be balanced by a responsibility, in this case a responsibility to abide by the law and not slander someone ... even if one disagrees fundamentally with a court verdict. You just can't go round calling someone acquitted of a killing "a murderer".