Producers deny defaming sanctuary

Photo: Andy Loveridge/Wildlife Conservation Research Unit

Photo: Andy Loveridge/Wildlife Conservation Research Unit

Published Nov 30, 2015

Share

Durban - There is no suggestion the producers of a documentary against canned lion hunting, Blood Lions, acted maliciously against Zanchieta Wildlife Sanctuary, and every comment featured in the documentary about the sanctuary is protected by the constitution.

This was the argument presented by the legal team acting for the film-makers, Regulus Vision, at the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Friday.

The producers have also denied defaming the sanctuary and claim they had permission to film the lions featured in the documentary.

Zanchieta launched an urgent application in the high court last week to halt further screenings of the documentary and asked the court to order Regulus Vision to remove images of two of its lions in the film, as well as associated websites.

Zanchieta director, Lizette van Schalkwyk, alleges members of Regulus Vision came to the sanctuary under false pretenses, and that because of the negative association the sanctuary has based on the documentary, it stands to close down due to a lack of funds and volunteers.

Despite the advocate for Zanchieta pleading with the court to stop two further screenings of the documentary scheduled in London over the weekend, Judge Fikile Mokgohloa said she could only give a ruling later this week to consider the vast amount of evidence she had before her.

The screenings in London went ahead as planned.

In court papers, Philippa Hankinson, sole director of Regulus Vision – which produced the documentary with the Wildlands Conservation Trust – said it was astounding that Zanchieta did not consider itself part of the industry of breeding lions in captivity through its hand-rearing of lion cubs in an active nursery to support breeders in the surrounding area.

In terms of regulations, animal sanctuaries are prohibited from breeding or operating nurseries, as Zanchieta did.

Hankinson also referred in her affidavit to excerpts from the documentary quoting an employee of Zanchieta, Jeana Gous, saying: “We don’t breed… Maybe once every second year we will let her get a litter, but we do not breed because of all the speculation and people saying you are just breeding for hunting. And we don’t, that’s not what we want.”

Gous also allegedly said the cubs were taken from their mothers 10 days after birth.

In the wild, cubs stayed with their mothers for two years, but when forcibly removed, the lionesses went back into oestrus to facilitate “multiple breeding cycles”, said Hankinson. She alleged the inescapable conclusion was Zanchieta took the cubs away “for this purpose”.

Hankinson said images of volunteers hand-rearing and playing with cubs at the nursery on the farm appeared on YouTube.

She further alleged that in “raw footage”, not included in the documentary, Gous allegedly acknowledged that Zanchieta raised lion cubs for breeders, which were sent back to the breeders to be sold to reserves.

Gous also allegedly said that one of Zanchieta’s lionesses, Princess, had three white cubs, of which two were sold to a private reserve in Denmark, and spoke about servals (African wild cats) being sold or given to Letsatsi La Africa game lodge, which had been linked to the bone trade and “wildlife trafficking”. These allegations were denied in replying papers by Gous and Van Schalkwyk.

Arguing for Regulus Vision on Friday, advocate Andrea Gabriel said there were only two images of Zanchieta lions in the documentary, depicted for a period of seconds. She also submitted Zanchieta had done nothing to defend itself on social media platforms regarding the alleged “negative association” the sanctuary had with canned lion hunting as a result of the documentary.

“They have done nothing to mitigate the so-called damages,” she said.

Gabriel also argued that the documentary and all content therein was protected by Section 16 of the Bill of Rights, and that Zanchieta failed to establish that they would suffer irreparable harm as a result of the documentary being screened. “While they may not like what is said in the documentary, what is said is actually fair comment,” she argued.

She said the documentary had been in circulation for seven months and was already in the public domain.

Gabriel also questioned the reason for the decline in volunteers at Zanchieta. “How do we know it is as a result of the documentary? Reasonable people are not going to see an image of a lion in a cage and automatically associate that lion as being at Zanchieta. There was no evidence anyone will identify the lions as being Zanchieta lions. The decline in volunteers could be because of the recession or the festive season. We simply do not know, and there is no evidence to believe otherwise,” Gabriel said.

Daily News

* Use IOL’s Facebook and Twitter pages to comment on our stories. See links below.

Related Topics: