There is a growing awareness around the world that experimenting on chimpanzees is wrong. Austria, the United Kingdom, Sweden, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Japan have banned or severely limited experiments on great apes. The United States is the last remaining large-scale user of chimpanzees for research.

A growing movement

In 1999, New Zealand became the first nation to ban research on chimpanzees. The United Kingdom had already banned new licenses for such research in 1997. More recently, the Netherlands and Sweden followed New Zealand’s lead with bans in 2002 and 2003, respectively, while Japan has placed a strong moratorium on chimpanzee research. In December 2005, the Austrian Parliament unanimously passed an amendment to forbid research on the great apes.

Four of these countries – the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Austria – are member states in the European Union, which does not have a ban on testing chimpanzees and other great apes. However, little to no chimpanzee testing occurs within its borders. (1) The last laboratory using chimpanzees in research in Western Europe stopped chimpanzee research in 2004 under order from the Dutch government. (2)

Austria

In December 2005, Austria amended its animal protection laws to forbid experiments on chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas. (3) Although those experiments are currently neither requested nor approved in Austria, the Education, Science, and Culture Minister, Elisabeth Gehrer, stated that:

Great apes are the animals that are most closely related to humans. It is of particular concern for me that there is this explicit prohibition. This will ensure that no such animal experiments will be carried out in the future either. (4)

— Austrian Education, Science, and Culture Minister Elisabeth Gehrer,
discussing Austria’s proposed ban on great ape research

United Kingdom

In 1997, the United Kingdom announced a policy to no longer grant licenses for research involving great apes. At the time, the British Home Secretary said:

[T]his is a matter of morality. The cognitive and behavioral characteristics and qualities of these animals mean it is unethical to treat them as expendable for research. (5)

— British Home Secretary,
announcing the United Kingdom’s policy in 1997

The U.K. continues to use other primates for research. (6)

However, a consortium of four research councils and organizations “has established a working group to examine the recent, current and future scientific basis for biological and medical research involving non-human primates.” (7) That study, which is the first of its kind, is chaired by University of Oxford genetics expert Sir David Weatherall, and will “involve a rigorous scientific assessment of whether there are alternatives to using non-human primates in research.” (8)

Generally, anti-vivisection groups have welcomed the study, but the British Union Against Vivisection (BUAV) has expressed concern that the study may not be impartial. (9) BUAV recently released a new report: Still Dying of Ignorance? 25 years of failed primate aids research.

The Netherlands

In 2002, the Dutch government prohibited further testing on chimpanzees after the end of trials already in progress. Article 10E of the Law on Animal Testing states that “[I]t is illegal to do an animal test that will include the use of chimpanzees, bonobos, orangutans, and gorillas.” (10)

In a letter to the Dutch Parliament on April 26, 2001, Dutch Minister of Science, Loek Hermans said:

In recent years it has become clear that the need for the use of chimpanzees for research into malaria and HIV has rapidly diminished and is of limited importance. The progression of illness in chimpanzees is starkly different from that of humans, which makes the chimpanzee an unsuitable ‘model’. (11)

— Dutch Minister of Science Loek Hermans,
in a letter to Dutch Parliament on April 26, 2001

In addition, the Dutch Parliament voted unanimously to disband the last chimpanzee population used for research in Europe. (12) The last EU laboratory to use chimpanzees in experiments was the Biomedical Primate Research Centre (BPRC) in Rijswijk, Netherlands. (13) Since BPRC obtains funding from the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science, the Dutch government “had a deciding vote in its future.” (14)

BPRC’s website states that, “In close consultation with the Dutch government BPRC has stopped all research with chimpanzees in 2004.” (15) However, prior to ending chimpanzee research, BPRC ran one final test on six young chimpanzees, and infected them with hepatitis C, an incurable disease. (16) During the study, these six chimpanzees languished in BPRC’s research facilities, which the Dutch government has admitted do “not meet generally accepted standards.” (17)

The Dutch government agreed to provide funding for BPRC’s chimpanzee population – numbering approximately 100 – based on building expenses and costs of lifetime care. (18) Approximately 36 healthy chimpanzees were awarded to a sanctuary, the Stichting AAP’s Sanctuary for Exotic Animals (AAP), and were to be relocated to a care-for-life AAP facility near Alicante, Spain. (19) Another 23 chimpanzees who were experimentally infected with potentially lethal viruses were also awarded to AAP to reside in a new AAP facility in the Netherlands designed to provide a combination of natural habitat and hospice care. (20) The remaining BPRC chimpanzees were to be allocated to zoos throughout Europe “considered to be reputable” by the Dutch government. (21)

The ban and BPRC closure were victories for the Coalition to End Experiments on Chimpanzees in Europe (CEECE), a coalition of Dutch and British animal protection groups, which had launched a public awareness campaign. (22)

AAP is a sanctuary active in the Netherlands and Spain and provides shelter for confiscated primates and abandoned pets. Read more about AAP here.

Japan

Japan has placed an unofficial moratorium on invasive chimpanzee research. (23) According to a 2002 article in the journal Nature, “Japanese academics have already halted invasive chimp research, and are pressing for a total ban – the country’s drug-industry labs currently hold 107 chimps, used for trials on hepatitis C and malaria.” (24)

New Zealand

[New Zealand’s ban on great ape research] may be a small step forward for the great apes, but it is nevertheless historic – the first time a parliament has voted in favor of changing the status of a group of animals so dramatically that the animal cannot be treated as a research tool….

— Peter Singer,
co-founder of the Great Ape Project

In October 1999, the New Zealand Parliament passed into law an amendment to their Animal Welfare Act, which banned the use of nonhuman hominids in research, testing, and teaching, except where such uses are in the best interests of the nonhuman hominid. (25) The Act defines a “nonhuman hominid” as “any non-human member of the family Hominidae, being a gorilla, chimpanzee, bonobo or orangutan.” (26)

Read the text of New Zealand’s amendment banning research on nonhuman hominids here.

In announcing the ban, New Zealand’s Minister for Food, Fibre, Biosecurity, and Border Control, the Honorable John Luxton, announced that the new Act would take the “small but nevertheless important step” of banning harmful experimentation on nonhuman hominids. (27) This legislation appears to be the “first legislation in the world to explicitly prohibit harmful research and testing on other hominids,” and may send a “moral message to other nations.” (28)

The ban resulted primarily from a campaign by the New Zealand branch of the Great Ape Project (GAP), which was co-founded by Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton and a pioneer in animal rights philosophy. (29) GAP is dedicated to “extending some legal rights to the great apes and thus greater protection from harm.” (30) Singer said that the New Zealand law:

…may be a small step forward for the great apes, but it is nevertheless historic - the first time a parliament has voted in favor of changing the status of a group of animals so dramatically that the animal cannot be treated as a research tool, to be used for the benefit of humans. … This is a breakthrough for our growing awareness and capacity to show respect for our closest non-human relatives. (31)

Sweden

Sweden banned the use of great apes in research in 2003. (32) However, the ban does not extend to non-invasive behavioral studies involving great apes “in and for which the animals are not euthanized or subjected to restraining devices, surgical procedures, injections, blood-letting, other forms of penetration of the skin or membranes or other procedures that may cause the animal suffering.” (33)

The ban is not yet formally a law, but is a binding regulation originally passed by the Swedish Board of Agriculture. (34) The regulation reads, as excerpted:

…[I]t is not allowed to use primates of species belonging to the family Great Apes (Pongidae) and the family Gibbons (Hylobathidae) in animal experimentation. …However, animals belonging to these species may be used, at a facility certified by § 37 of the Animal Protection Regulation (1988:539), for behavioural studies in and for which the animals are not euthanized or subjected to restraining devices, surgical procedures, injections, blood-letting, other forms of penetration of the skin or membranes or other procedures that may cause the animal suffering.” (35)

According to the September 2005 responses of Animal Rights Sweden to a survey conducted by the European Coalition to End Animal Experiments, no great apes are used for research in Sweden, and there are no breeding facilities for primates in research in the country. (36)

Australia

The Policy on the Care and Use of Non-Human Primates for Scientific Purposes put forth by the National Health and Medical Research Council in Australia states:

The species of great ape, gorilla, orangutan, chimpanzee and bonobo, are closely related to humans in evolution. Proposals to AECs requesting the use of great apes for scientific purposes may pose particular concerns.

Great apes may only be used for scientific purposes if the following conditions are met:

• Resources, including staff and housing, are available to ensure high standards of care for the animals
• The use would potentially benefit the individual animal and the species to which the animal belongs
• The potential benefits of the scientific knowledge gained will outweigh harm to the animal (37)

Balearic Islands

The Parliament of the Balearic Islands, one of the Autonomous Communities of Spain, recently announced its approval of a resolution to grant legal rights to great apes. This resolution has also been presented to the Spanish Government. The resolution “recognizes basic legal protections supported by biological and scientific evidence…” (38)

If you have additional information, please contact us.

Last revised: 10/22/07

Related news: May 25, 2006 - Two federal commissions in Switzerland call for ban on great ape testing

Sources

(1) http://www.bprc.nl/BPRCE/L3/RelocChimps.html

(2) Ibid.

(3) http://www.vgt.at/

(4) www.eubusiness.com/topics/Rd/apes.2005-05-10

(5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Ape_research_ban

(6) Ibid.

(7) www.eubusiness.com/topics/Rd/apes.2005-05-10

(8) Ibid.

(9) Ibid.

(10) http://www.banaperesearch.org/docs/dutchlaw.htm

(11) http://ww2.wspa-international.org/action/ceece/ceece2.html
http://pace.org.uk/campaign.htm

(12) http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/02/11/chimps1102.html

(13) http://www.ippl.org/08-02-21.html
(Wim de Kok, Stichting AAP consultant, “Dutch Lab Chimps to be Retired”, International Primate Protection League (Aug. 2002))

(14) http://www.ippl.org/08-02-21.html

(15) http://www.bprc.nl/BPRCE/L3/RelocChimps.html

(16) http://www.petaeurope.org/feat/bprc/

(17) Ibid.

(18) http://www.petaeurope.org/feat/bprc/
http://www.bprc.nl/BPRCE/L3/RelocChimps.html
http://www.ippl.org/08-02-21.html

(19) http://www.ippl.org/08-02-21.html
http://www.peta.org.uk/factsheet/files/FactsheetDisplay.asp?ID=135

(20) Ibid.

(21) http://www.ippl.org/08-02-21.html

(22) Ibid.

(23) http://www.villagevoice.com/arts/0232,edwinter,37190,12.html

(24) http://www.banaperesearch.org/docs/japan.htm
(citing “The Great Primate Debate,” Nature, Vol. 417, p. 3 (June 13, 2002)).

(25) http://www.animallaw.info/journals/jo_pdf/lralvol_7p35.pdf (Rowan Taylor, A Step at a Time: New Zealand’s Progress Toward Hominid Rights, Animal Law Journal (2001)); www.lisp.com.au/~primate/glenys.htm

(26) http://www.animallaw.info/journals/jo_pdf/lralvol_7p35.pdf (Taylor, Animal Law Journal, p. 36 n. 9).

(27) Ibid. p. 36

(28) Ibid. p. 38

(29) http://www.lisp.com.au/~primate/glenys.htm

(30) Ibid.

(31) Ibid.

(32) Per-Anders Svard, Answers from Djurens Ratt/Animal Rights Sweden to ECEAE Questionnaire/Primates Campaign (Sept. 2005)

(33) Ibid.

(34) Ibid.

(35) http://www.djurskyddsmyndigheten.se/Documents/DFS_2005_L55_1_2.pdf (Translation from Swedish courtesy of Per-Anders Svard, President, Djurens Ratt/Animal Rights Sweden) http://www.banaperesearch.org/docs/swedishlaw.htm

(36) Per-Anders Svard, Answers from Djurens Ratt/Animal Rights Sweden to ECEAE Questionnaire/Primates Campaign (Sept. 2005)

(37) http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/ethics/animal/issues/nonhuman.htm

(38) http://www.greatapeproject.org/news.php