Over the weekend, a CDA-related news story started circulating on social media, alleging that a few suspects “broke into” CDA’s shelter for stray dogs and stole away 50 to 60 dogs. FIRs were filed against these “suspects,” who were then forced into jail.
But were these dogs stolen or being saved from the shelter?
The dire conditions at CDA’s dog “shelter” are public knowledge by now. Animals are visibly malnourished, weak, and neglected. CDA is even facing court cases for these issues, with animal welfare activists arguing for humane population control policies and reforms at this shelter, none of which have been implemented so far.
The conditions at this shelter are so poor that dogs are left with no choice but to eat each other to fill their empty stomachs out of desperation. The animal welfare activists, addressed as “suspects” in the FIR, had to intervene more than a few times to try to keep these dogs fed.
Sources told ProPakistani that even a CDA member, Sajjad Bhatti, acknowledged the urgency and facilitated the rescue of some animals for immediate care, which transforms the act from “trespass” into moral intervention. In fact, it can no longer even be labeled as “trespass” if a CDA official is allowing these “suspects” in to try and save the poor dogs. This debunks the greatly exaggerated FIR that accused the animal welfare activists of “forced entry.”
The accused in this case now sits in judicial custody, expected to seek bail. Their fate will be decided by the courts. Even the dogs rescued from the shelter have been sent back.
In the end, the truth of the story only begs the question: Should compassion become a punishable offense when government bodies fail to provide for the dogs they swear to protect? Isn’t the whole point of “shelters” to provide a safe and healthy haven for animals in need?
Had the conditions at this shelter been better, there would have been no need for intervention in the first place.