The 74th meeting of the CITES Standing Committee in Lyon, France, confirmed that CITES has been corrupted by prohibitionists committed to subverting its purpose. SC74 went off-piste by demanding, for example, bans on the domestic ivory and rhino horn markets, as well as, without authority, expertise or evidence, leveraging the COVID-19 pandemic to clamp down on the movement and management of wild animals.
The prohibitionists say that the only way to combat illegal trade in wildlife is to ban the legal one because the latter generates consumer demand that is satisfied by poachers and other criminals. This circular argument is rooted in faith and ideology rather than scientific and empirical evidence. It is an outlook that sees the exploitation of wild animals for human gain as morally wrong because, as Born Free says, ‘every wild animal deserves to be able to live a life in freedom, with their own kind, and on their own terms.’
But this faith-driven prohibitionist viewpoint is incompatible with CITES’ founding principles, which took the efficacy of the wildlife trade for granted until proven otherwise. But to be certain that IWMC’s critique of the prohibition camp is justified, we are issuing a challenge to the NGOs and other actors who ruled the roost at SC74. Please, we beg them, answer the following ten questions:
The onus is on NGOs and their supporters – be they Parties to CITES or not – to answer these questions because the burden of proof rests with them. What is intolerable is to continue to allow the core purpose of CITES to be subverted by ideologues without evidence.
There are 10 questions in this survey.