LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

B.A. LL.B. (INTEGRATED LAW DEGREE COURSE)

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW (VI SEMESTER)

“PROJECT WORK”

“LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES”

SUBMISSION TO: SUBMITTED BY:

MR. ZAIN SALEH RAJVEER SINGH INDA

FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 17RU11021

DESIGNATION: ASSISTANT PROFESSOR SESSION:-2017-2022

SEMESTER:-VI

1|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this opportunity to express our humble gratitude and personal regards to MR ZAIN SALEH
for inspiring me and guiding me during the course of this project work and also for his
cooperation and guidance from time to time during the course of this project work on the topic
“LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES”.

Date of Submission: 18-04-2020

Name of Student: RAJVEER SINGH INDA

2|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 5

Historical Background........................................................................................................... 6

Existing Situations ................................................................................................................ 7

Impact of Illegal Wildlife Trade .......................................................................................... 10

Indian Legal Framework ..................................................................................................... 11

International Framework-CITES ......................................................................................... 12

Critical Analysis of CITES .................................................................................................. 14

Conclusion and Recommendations ...................................................................................... 16

Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... 18

3|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

ABSTRACT

The legal and illegal trade in wild animals and their products is a multi-billion-dollar industry
that threatens the health and well-being of humans and animals alike. The management of the
wildlife trade is a crisis-driven area, where decisions are made quickly, and, often, inefficiently.
In particular, the regulation and control of the illegal wildlife trade is hampered by a dearth of
formal quantitative analysis of the nature of the trade. The Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) entered into force in 1975 and over
180 countries, or Parties, have signed up, committing to protect over 35,000 animal and plant
species from unsustainable or illegal international trade. Arguably the strongest of the
biodiversity conventions, its provisions are translated into national legislation by Parties; it
provides a legal framework for the regulation of trade in those species that are exploited
commercially for international trade. India is also a member of the CITES (Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora) since 1976. TRAFFIC, a
wildlife trade monitoring network and a joint programme of WWF, the global conservation
organisation and IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, established in
1976, works closely with the National and the State Governments and various agencies to help
study, monitor and influence action to curb illegal wildlife trade and bring wildlife trade within
sustainable levels. Over the year’s illegal wildlife trade has emerged as a form of Organised
Transnational Crime that has threatened the existence of many wild species across the globe.
This paper focuses on the far-reaching consequences of the environmental crime phenomenon
which are faced today. The paper also addresses the situation that has worsened to the extent
that illegal trade in wildlife’s impacts are now acknowledged to go well beyond strictly
environmental impacts by seriously undermining economies and livelihoods, good governance,
and the rule of law.

KEYWORDS- Illegal wildlife trade Biodiversity Ecosystem Sustainable development

4|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

INTRODUCTION

The illegal trade of wildlife species has long been a problem that lately has captured the
attention of the wildlife protectors and public across disciplines. Criminologists and criminal
justice pupils are an increasing number of discovering the theme from a range of perspectives
with the goal of understanding the nature of the alternate and how to mitigate it.

Wildlife trade has been a restricted but also a practiced which has been accepted as vital to
human development. Along with other factors, such as climate change and loss in forestation,
illegal trade has contributed to the extinction of many species of fauna. This is not an issue
which is overlooked. The people and governments along with other inter-governmental
organisations have acknowledged it and tried to formulate regulations to curb the practice.
Inspire of efforts, the species have faced extinction or are on the brink of it.

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is
an international agreement between governments. Its aim is to ensure that international trade
in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. It can be said that, as
of present, CITES not only is the framework of law which is regulate illegal trade on a global
level but has also been the basis for legislations domestically. The laws in India regulated by
The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (last amended in 2006) National Wildlife Action Plan
(2002-2016).

5|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

“Wildlife crime is the taking, trading, exploiting or possessing of the world’s wild flora and
fauna in contravention of country wide and international laws.”1 Whether species are poached
for subsistence like meat or personal possession like bangles, ivory etc. for local or
international trade, cultural or religious beliefs, or as a result of human-animal conflict, a
wildlife crime has occurred. Such a definition, however, does not cowl “harms” to animals that
may additionally lead to extinction however is otherwise criminal. Such harms normally come
in the shape of habitat loss or deforestation, the exercise of clearing a giant number of bushes
for agricultural functions or for human contract.2 Deforestation is the important threat 3of
extinction for most of the wildlife on earth due to the fact it removes appropriate habitat for
tens of millions of species3 and exacerbates climate change4 because deforestation is commonly
sanctioned by means of governments, it is not a crime in the standard sense and will not be the
centre of attention of this systematic review. But it leads to trading of wildlife species too for
human’s increasing need due to change in climate.

For centuries, flora and fauna were once taken from the wild for profit, private use, or killed
because they had been a nuisance. The retaliatory killing of elephants, tigers, lions etc. for
example, has been a common exercise in range states after attacking humans and/or their
livestock. Many of these practices has been not towards the law before. Even in times or places
the place it was once unlawful, it was once often unnoticed or ignored with the aid of law
enforcement. In cases where animals had been trapped or poached for profit, a good deal of
this change was for local markets. As the world became more globalized in the latter a long
time of the 20th century, so too did the illegal natural world trade. Species once poached for
nearby or country wide demand are now trafficked via multiple nations and ports to attain
markets on the other side of the world. Poachers may additionally no longer be completely
locals; outsiders are now sometimes involved in search of pretty endangered and treasured
species such as rhinos and elephants. Because of this global demand in mixture with accelerated
habitat loss, the unlawful flora and fauna trade is extensively contributing to the decline of
many species and, a great share of endangered species. 5 Some have claimed that we are

1
The International Criminal Police Organisation, 2015.
2
Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of deforestation by Helmut J. Geist and Eric F. Lambin, February
2002 / Volume 52.
3
Biodiversity extinction by numbers by Stuart L. Pimm and Peter Raven, February 2000 / Volume 403.
4
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment report on Ecosystem and Human well-being, 2005.
5
Overexploitation and Species Extinction by Alison M. Rosser and Sue A. Mainka, published on 28th May 2002.

6|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

currently experiencing the sixth mass extinction, where up to 1,00,000 species go extinct on an
annual groundwork due to human-based pastime such as trade of the species.

EXISTING SITUATIONS

International commercial exchange in the natural world and its components and derivatives is
estimated to be expanding, in both value and volume terms. For every species, trade may
additionally have advantageous and bad consequences for conservation and the long-term
survival of species and biological diversity. For example, advantages from trade can provide
incentives for sustainable use and management of species but can lead to over harvesting and
broader negative effects on the ecosystem. Comparably, trade may have effective or poor
penalties for the local livelihoods of the poor, specifically their earnings source, assets, and
wellbeing. “Illicit wildlife trafficking” describes any environment-related crime that involves
the illegal trade, smuggling, poaching, capture or collection of endangered species, protected
wildlife (including animals and plants that are subject to harvest quotas and regulated by
permits), derivatives or products thereof. 6

International demand for wildlife products and services has provided several livelihood
opportunities for indigent communities because many wildlife resources are in growing
countries. However, high-value exchange of wildlife species can also marginalize poor
communities or create dependence on an unsustainable level of harvest. For some species,
widespread unlawful alternate also poses a security threat. TRAFFIC 7 has estimated legal 8
worldwide trade, consisting of trees and fisheries products, at US$ 323 billion in 2009
(TRAFFIC, 2014).

There are many different estimates of the commercial value of illicit wildlife trafficking
worldwide, however, reliable estimates are hard to find, mainly because the trade is illegal.
Unreported and unregulated fisheries trade alone have been estimated at between US$4.2
billion and US$9.5 billion per year, the value of the illegal timber trade as much as US$7 billion
per year, and the illicit wildlife trafficking (excluding fisheries and timber) as between US$7.8
billion and US$10 billion per year.8 Combining these numbers, illicit wildlife 9 trafficking

6
South, N. and Wyatt, T. 2011. Comparing illicit trades in wildlife and drugs: an exploratory study, Deviant
Behavior, 32:6, 538–61
7
The wildlife trade monitoring network
8
Myburgh, J. in: Haken, J. 2011. Transnational Crime in the Developing World, Global Financial Integrity,
Washington, DC, USA

7|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

(including timber and fisheries) comprises the fourth largest global illegal trade after narcotics,
humans and counterfeit products.9

Illicit wildlife trafficking has been on the rise over the last few years despite the combined
efforts of the international community, governments and civil society. The trend can be
confirmed by some of the most recent events with respect to wildlife trafficking. For example,
2011 was the highest year on record for elephant poaching; the theft of rhinoceros horns from
museums, auction houses and antique shops has risen in the European Union; ivory estimated
to weigh more than 23 tonnes – a figure that represents 2,500 elephants – was confiscated in
17 large-scale seizures of illegal ivory in 2011; and the illegal poaching of rhinos in South
Africa surged to a record high in 2011, with a final death toll of 448.4 WWF has confirmed
that between 2007 and 2011 the numbers of rhinos poached in South Africa escalated by
3,000%.

In February 2012, hundreds of elephants were slaughtered in a single incident in Bouba

N’Djida National Park, Cameroon, by poaching gangs. The gangs are said to have originated
from Chad and Sudan and to have entered Cameroon through neighbouring countries. 10 Similar
mass elephant poaching events have since occurred throughout Central Africa.11 The
seriousness and scale of the February incident in Cameroon was a wake-up 12 call for the
international community in terms of the security threat posed by these actions. Emerging
evidence of rhinoceros’ horn being used as a palliative medicine for cancer, along with its use
as a “hangover cure”12 by opulent people in some nations, explains the upsurge 13 in
rhinoceros’ horn trading in Viet Nam. This trade is underpinned by persistent urban myths and
hype about dubious miraculous cures and cancer remission following treatments using
rhinoceros horn. The appetite for the substance is playing an significant role in the increase in
global demand for rhinoceros horn. 13

9
http://transcrime.gfintegrity.org
10
CITES. 2012. CITES Secretary-General expresses grave concern over reports of mass elephant killings in
Cameroon. (28 February 2012). CITES, Geneva, Switzerland. 2012/20120228_elephant_cameroon.php
11
Haken, J. 2011., Transnational Crime In The Developing World. Global Financial Integrity, Washington, DC,
USA.
12
TRAFFIC. 2008. What’s Driving the Wildlife Trade? A Review of Expert Opinion on Economic and Social
Drivers of the Wildlife Trade and Trade Control Efforts in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR and Vietnam. East
Asia and Pacific Region Sustainable Development Discussion Papers. East Asia and Pacific Region Sustainable
Development Department, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA.
13
Milliken, T. and Shaw, J. 2012. The South Africa-Vietnam Rhino Horn Trade Nexus: A Deadly Combination
of Institutional Lapses, Corrupt Wildlife Industry Professionals and Asian Crime Syndicates. TRAFFIC,
Johannesburg, South Africa.

8|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

The demand for animal products arises from varied groups of consumers and in a few cases is
heavily influenced by culture. On one side of the spectrum, the demand is driven by the medical
value of some of the products or the societal status associated with them. On the other side, the
demand is fuelled by opportunistic purchasing and usually unknowing tourists who buy
souvenirs or pets to take home. The sources of demand most frequently stated by government
representatives are:

i. Medicinal products - Perceived medicinal value, such as cancer treatment, is driving

demand.
ii. Consumer goods - Associated social status is driving demand – for example, at the
CITES 62nd Standing Committee meeting a representative from the Chinese
government stated, “In recent years, the collection of arts and crafts, jewellery and
antiques, including ivory carvings, has become fashionable and the price of those items
has increased significantly.” 14

The IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) maintains a “Red List” of
species around the world where they are categorised by risk of extinction ranging from least
concern to extinct. As of 2007, more than 40,000 species appeared on the list, with 16,306
at risk for extinction. 15 The potential loss of majestic species, such as the Sumatran tiger or
the 16 Asian panda, is often highlighted in order to raise awareness of human threats to
endangered species; but ecologists argue that the loss of less-heralded plants and organisms
could be more concerning since the ecosystem services that they provide is, in many cases,
not well understood.

There are a number of measures in place at local, regional, national, and international levels
which aim to reduce the risk of species extinction. The measures most commonly address
habitat loss due to human encroachment and over-exploitation through hunting, fishing,
and trade.

14
CITES Management Authority of China. 2012. Control of Trade in Ivory in China (report to 62nd Standing
Committee meeting: SC62 Inf. (8) CITES Management Authority of China, Beijing, China.
<www.cites.org/eng/com/ SC/62/Inf/E62i-08.pdf>
15
https://www.iucnredlist.org/about/background-history

9|P a ge
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

IMPACT OF ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE

The IUCN defines conservation as the ‘protection, care, management and upkeep of
ecosystems, habitats, wildlife species, and populations, within or outside of their natural
environments, in order to shield the natural conditions for their long-term permanence.
Harvesting of wildlife species for global trade can have fantastic and bad effects on
conservation. These largely rely on whether the harvest is consistent with ‘sustainable use’,
that is ‘the use of factors of biological diversity in a way and at a rate that does no longer lead
to the long-term decline of biological diversity’, and thereby keeps their contribution to existing
and future generations.

Those species valued on local or global markets for consumptive use can also be at larger risk
of over-exploitation. While there do not appear to be any documented examples of species
extinction with the aid of international trade, harvest for global trade (legal or illegal) has truly
led to the overexploitation of some species. For example, there are many documented cases of
trade in non-timber wooded area products leading to resource depletion. 16

Wildlife harvest for trade can be maintained at sustainable levels, consistent with biodiversity
conservation. Beyond this, however, trade in wildlife can have high quality conservation affects
where it creates incentives for sustainable use and management of target species and their
habitats.

Bans on trade can be useful in some cases, such as to allow species to recover when stocks are
depleted. But in different instances they can create negative conservation incentives. For
example, species may become undervalued and habitat converted to greater productive uses,
such as agriculture or plantation forestry. Alternatively, where species hold their market value,
exchange bans may also stimulate unlawful alternate and excess harvesting.

The effect of illicit wildlife trafficking on the environment is direct and potentially irreversible.
Recently there has been a drastic decline in the populations of many wildlife species with high
commercial value, many of which are now rare, endangered or locally extinct – for example,
forest elephants in certain parts of the Congo basin, the Sumatran rhinoceros, the Javan
rhinoceros and the Asian elephant.

16
Role of Non-Timber Forest Products

10 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

Wildlife trade, legal and illegal, is also associated with the introduction of invasive species.
These invasive species prey on or compete with native species and are a major threat to the
balance of ecosystems. For example, pet Burmese pythons let loose by their owners are now
considered a major pest in Florida’s everglades.

INDIAN LEGAL FRAMEWORK

1. THE WILDLIFE (PROTECTION) ACT, 1972 (LAST AMENDED IN 2006)

National parks and Tiger Reserves are by means of regulation more strictly protected,
permitting certainly no human endeavour without that which is in the interest of flora
and fauna conservation. Grazing and non-public tenurial rights are disallowed in
National Parks but can be allowed in sanctuaries at the discretion of the Chief Wildlife
Warden. The amended WLPA does no longer enable for any business exploitation of
wooded area produce in each country wide parks and natural world sanctuaries, and
local communities can collect woodland produce solely for their bona fide needs. No
wild mammal, bird, amphibian, reptile, fish, crustacean, insects, or coelenterates listed
in four Schedules of the WLPA can be hunted either within or backyard protected areas.
On conviction, the penalty for searching is imprisonment for a duration ranging from a
minimal of three to a most of seven years with fines not much less than 10,000 rupees.
Community reserves and conservation reserves are two new categories of protected
areas that have been protected under the WLPA. These two classes grant an increased
function for neighbourhood communities, stakeholders and civil society as properly as
the possibility to protect many areas of conservation price that cannot be precise
underneath strict categories such as natural world sanctuaries or countrywide parks.
2. THE BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY ACT (2002)
India is a member to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. The
provisions of the Biological Diversity Act are in addition to and not in derogation of
the provisions in any other law referring to forests or wildlife.
3. NATIONAL WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN (2002-2016)
This legislation replaces the formerly Plan adopted in 1983 and was introduced in
response to the need for an exchange in priorities given the increased commercial use
of natural resources, the continued increase of human and livestock populations, and
adjustments in consumption patterns. The Plan most intently represents an authentic
policy on the safety of wildlife. It focuses on strengthening and improving the covered

11 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

location network, on the conservation of endangered wildlife and their habitats, on

controlling alternate in flora and fauna merchandise and on research, education, and
training. The Plan endorses two new protected place categories: “conservation
reserves,” referring to corridors connecting protected areas, and “community reserves”,
which will allow increased participation of nearby communities in covered location
management via normal or cultural conservation practices. These new categories of
blanketed areas are probable to bring in hall areas underneath protection. The Plan
carries quite a number pointer to tackle the needs of neighbourhood communities
dwelling outside blanketed areas and outlines the need for voluntary relocation and
rehabilitation of villages within covered areas. The Plan acknowledges the want to
minimize human-wildlife warfare and emphasizes the institution of nice compensation
mechanisms. It includes the restoration of degraded habitats outside blanketed areas as
a key objective.

INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK-CITES

Despite the best intentions and efforts, combating the illegal wildlife trade effectively cannot
fall upon a single nation in the world. Most wildlife is not endemic to one country, and wildlife
often migrates across geopolitical boundaries. Criminals in the trade often facilitate this
migration by poaching, trafficking, processing, and selling wildlife to consumers that span
several countries and regions of the world. For these reasons, combating the illegal wildlife
trade must be a coordinated effort that utilises local, national, regional, and international
cooperation.

A number of bilateral and multinational agreements have been put in place over the last century
or so to conserve species in danger of extinction. In the first half of the 20th century, such
agreements, in addition to national legislation, restricted hunting and trading of wildlife in
various ways. Many of these agreements and national regulations were unsuccessful in their
objectives, which allowed unsustainable wildlife poaching and trafficking to persist. For
example, the International Agreement for the Regulation of Whaling signed in 1937 was seen
as a failure because it did not impose size or catch limits).

The failure of national regulations and international agreements, along with the rise in the
illegal wildlife trade of threatened species, instigated the 1973 drafting of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). This was

12 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

subsequently put into effect in 1975 with 80 nations agreeing to regulate trade in wildlife and
prohibit the trade of the most at-risk species from overexploitation.

CITES is a multilateral environmental agreement which aims to ensure that international trade
in specimens of wild animal and plant species does not threaten their survival. CITES’
objective is to control the effects of international trade on the conservation status of threatened
species of animals and plants. Its primary aim is the prevention of unsustainable trade, not the
promotion of sustainable alternatives or attention to the livelihoods of those who depend on the
trade.17 Although there are moves to give it regional and ecosystem ambitions, CITES currently
has a species and consignment-orientation, compatible with its focus on international trade.18

CITES is legally binding on its members, providing a framework of conduct which they adhere
to through enacting appropriate national legislation. Successful implementation relies on co-
operation between the member states and effective enforcement of domestic law at the national
level. Bringing national legislation up to international standards has been a main focus of
CITES in recent years, and is one of its more positive aspects.

CITES introduced three appendices in which listed species are afforded greater protection
when traded between countries. Appendix I species are prohibited in international commercial
trade because the trade may greatly impact these vulnerable species. The African elephant,
cheetah, giant panda, tigers, and most rhino species are among the most notable species listed
under Appendix I. Appendix II species are not always at-risk of extinction but can be at-risk
without a system of regulations. Such species may be commercially traded only if export
permits are procured, and depending on the import nation, may also require import permits.
Appendix III is reserved for species that are requested to be listed and protected by a member
nation so that other member nations avoid exploitation of said species.

CITES regulates wildlife trade primarily through a system of permits and certificates that must
be issued by national authorities before specimens can enter or leave countries involved in
international trade. The permit system is applied to a three-tiered classification which accords
varying degrees of protection to listed species. These listings lie at the heart of the CITES
system of compliance. In accordance with Article IX of the Convention, each party is required

17
(Reeve, 2002:29; Roe et al, 2002:89)
18
Matthews (1996:421-1) notes that a greater focus on keystone species would help link species protection and
ecosystem functions. However important keystone species, e.g. sea-otters, may not be intensively traded and
might be more at risk from other threats.

13 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

to nominate a national ‘Management Authority’ 19 which administers the licensing system and
one or more Scientific Authorities to provide guidance to the Management Authority on the
effects of trade on the conservation status of the species in question. The Management
Authority is responsible for implementing the Convention in its country, and is the sole body
which can grant import and export permits and re-export certificates on behalf of the Party.
Trade permits must conform to the requirements of the official listing of the species in question.

The official listings are agreed at the Conferences of the Parties (CoPs), held every two and a
half years, and reviewed periodically. A two-thirds majority of the CoP is needed to agree a
new listing or a change in them. Critics maintain that this inflicts an excessive burden of
responsibility on the proponents of a listing and works in opposition to the precautionary
principle, which is otherwise central to the convention’s rationale. 20 At the same time, it does
permit a certain flexibility and quicker responses than would the consensus-based decision-
making that is favoured by other conventions.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF CITES

Compliance control in CITES is a complex matter, demanding heavy inputs of time from
Secretariat staff, often arguably disproportionate to the commercial value of the trade, though
not necessarily its global sensitivity. The fact that the trade concerns relations between
sovereign states imposes limitations on the ability of the Convention to act in a policing role,
though at the same time, its international trade focus does expand the information base
available to it, and gives it some authority to act on behalf of the international community.

There are concerns that CITES doesn’t adequately address the issue of sustainable use, being
more focussed on mitigating the effects of trade on species preservation.

Nevertheless, CITES does have the ability to save some species from extinction and protect
others from being at-risk, however, the success of CITES is contingent on a number of working
parts that may be lacking or failing altogether. First, the lack of enforcement and compliance
of CITES objectives at the national and local levels has hindered its overall effectiveness.21
One such instance is Africa, where lack of enforcement and compliance 22 disproportionately

19
There may be multiple Scientific Authorities but only one Management Authority. In the UK, the Department
for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)-Ministry for the Environment form the sole Management
Authority but there are two scientific authorities – the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew for plants, and the Joint
Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) for animals.
20
(Matthews, 1996: 422)
21
Han 2014; Schneider 2012; Rosen and Smith 2010; Leader-Williams 2003; Vasquez 2003

14 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

occurs which had the most biodiverse regions of the world. Non-compliance and enforcement
problems in Africa are due to a myriad of problems that include (1) corruption, (2) wars, (3)
limited resources, (4) lack of political commitment and stability, and (5) domestic conflict.
Second,22 evaluating whether CITES policies are effective is 23 difficult given data limitations.
For example, population counts are not collected for many threatened species that are listed
under CITES.23 Third, trade bans may increase black market 24 prices for threatened and
endangered species, which can exacerbate poaching. 24 Fourth, 25 locals may not be
incentivized to preserve wildlife when the ability to legally trade them is removed. Some
suggest that people only value and protect wildlife if they can benefit from using it.25 Finally,
CITES is limited because it is designed to address only the illegal 26 international trade in
wildlife and not international trade. Recent research shows the domestic trade in illegal wildlife
is quite substantial26 and may even be larger than the 27 international trade for some species.

22
Schneider 2012; Fiadjoe 2004
23
Abensperg-Traun et al. 2009; Phelps et al. 2010; Parsons et al. 2010
24
MacMillan and Han 2011; Pires and Moreto 2011; Hall et al. 2008; Courchamp et al. 2006; ’t Sas-Rolfes 2000
25
Dickson 2003; Leader-Williams 2003; Martin 2000
26
Pires 2012; Pires and Moreto 2011; Nijman 2010; Tilson et al. 2010; Du Plessis 2000

15 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The updating of legal and regulatory systems and effective implementation, is a fundamental
element for combating wildlife and forest crime. This may include creating clear definitions of
illegal activities, establishing significant deterrent sanctions, and specifying relevant control
and enforcement powers at every stage in the supply chain. Interventions to address the
problem of weak enforcement and prosecution include:

 Addressing gaps in legislation identified in evaluating impactful practices;

 Enhancing international and regional cooperation within the framework of the ICCWC,
the Convention on Transboundary Crime and among regional wildlife enforcement
networks (WENs), and seek opportunities for synergies between these different
frameworks to reduce duplication of effort;
 Ensuring that wildlife commodities not listed under CITES, in particular timber, fish,
charcoal and bush meat are also taken into account within the abovementioned
frameworks, where relevant;
 Developing mechanisms to facilitate rapid intelligence exchange among enforcement
networks nationally (where not yet implemented) and internationally;
 Capacity building not only of enforcement officials, judiciary and customs officers, but
also protected area managers and local communities involved in wildlife protection and
management;
 Supporting the development of traceability systems to reduce laundering of illegal
goods within legal supply chains, for example through the development of best-practice
guidelines;
 Ensuring laws are in place which protect legitimate social interest of people at the same
time ensuring long-term economic use of a wildlife resource; and
 Reviewing the legal status of trapping/harvesting methods that are detrimental to non-
target individuals and species.

With respect to the existing legal framework it can be observed that national sovereignty and
responsibility are at the heart of the CITES approach. In the words of one commentator, ‘CITES
actively embraces the principle that individual states are the best protectors of native species

16 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

and endeavours to establish an arena of international cooperation [around it]’.27 The impact of
the Convention depends heavily on the validity or otherwise of that principle.

Many of the limitations of the system derive from the gulf between the expectations of the
Secretariat and its mandate, resources and capacity. The absence of systematic extra-house
monitoring is an issue, in part because it diminishes the credibility of the most crucial elements
of the information system, generated where the consignments are sourced. External NGO
monitors perform important monitoring functions, though they are restricted in their access,
and, as far as the producer countries are concerned, have to rely heavily on the evidence of a
few exposed points in the trade. These include species in transit and transhipment.

However, the management of an extra-house monitoring facility would need careful handling
in the context of an international convention covering items within sovereign territory, and the
effects on the general functioning of the Secretariat could be significant. Nor would it
necessarily be regarded as a positive development. For all its limitations, CITES does benefit
from the active participation of a multiplicity of stakeholders, in both formal and informal
arenas. In the words of one informant, NGOs ‘circle the CoPs like hawks’, and contribute
actively to ensuring that such meetings are marked by a high level of debate. While this does
tend to mean that northern interests are represented disproportionately, this is a situation which
reflects global realities and is not CITES-specific.

All in all, CITES is widely viewed as one of the more effective Conventions. It has shown a
willingness to evolve in positive directions and it offers a forum which, if not always fully
transparent, does give all players an arena in which to express their views. It is evidently one
in which the parties see some value, illustrated by their willingness to participate actively in its
deliberations and the steps which some of them take to try to influence its decisions.

27
Young, 2003:173

17 | P a g e
 LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE TRADE OF WILDLIFE SPECIES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 David Brown and Erin Swalis, ‘Comparative Study (3), The Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)’ (2005)
 Rosalind Reeve, ‘Wildlife trade, sanctions and compliance: lessons from the CITES
regime’ (2006) Vol. 82, No. 5
 Christian Nellemann, ‘The Environmental Crime Crisis - Threats to Sustainable
Development from Illegal Exploitation and Trade in Wildlife and Forest Resources’,
UNEP Rapid Response Assessment, 2014
 Barry Walden Walsh, ‘Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora: A CITES Timeline’, ‘Selbyana’ (2005) Vol. 26, No 1/2, pp. 92-
102
 CITES 2013a, ‘Consideration of proposals for amendment of Appendices I and II.
Inclusion of the genus Dalbergia (populations of Madagascar) in CITES Appendix II.’,
CoP16 Prop. 63

18 | P a g e