The Supreme Court's Directive on Stray Dogs
The Supreme Court of India's order on August 11, 2025, to round up and incarcerate all street dogs in New Delhi was criticized as being scientifically unsound, legally questionable, and morally problematic. The directive was stayed by the Court on August 22, 2025, but it highlighted a disregard for scientific evidence and constitutional compassion.
Criticism of the Directive
- Public Health Concerns: The concept of mass shelters for dogs has been unsuccessful even in developed countries, leading to overcrowding, psychological distress, aggression, and disease transmission.
- Ecological Impact: Removing dogs would create a vacuum, leading to migration from neighboring states and potential increases in rodent and monkey populations.
- Moral and Social Implications: The order ignored the symbiotic relationship between street dogs and marginalized urban populations, serving as companions and protectors for the homeless.
- Legal Contradictions: It contradicted previous rulings upholding the Animal Birth Control Rules, advocating for humane and scientific management of street dogs.
Alternative Approaches
- Animal Birth Control (ABC) Programme: Successful in cities like Jaipur, focusing on sterilization and vaccination as effective methods for population control.
- Targeted Interventions: Evidence-based approaches to capture and observe specific aggressive dogs, rather than indiscriminate removal.
Underlying Issues
- Critics argue that the focus on street dogs diverts attention from larger governance issues in Delhi, such as infrastructure failures, corruption, and inflation.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's initial order was considered a setback for science and compassion, prioritizing political convenience over effective governance. The real solution lies in implementing humane and scientific strategies like sterilization and vaccination.
