Protected, but not enough: the plight of nationally-protected non-CITES wildlife species

ARTICLE

Protected, but not enough: the plight of nationally-protected non-CITES wildlife species

AGerman citizen travels to Indonesia and illegally purchases ten rare songbirds, to be sold as exotic pets in the European Union. The birds are wild-caught Sumatran Laughingthrushes (Garrulax bicolor), classified as endangered on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and protected under Indonesia’s national wildlife law. Each individual is worth over 1,000 Euros in the European market. The German citizen successfully smuggles the songbirds out of Indonesia to the Netherlands, knowing that they can now be freely and legally traded within the EU. Why is this the case and what needs to change to ensure that all species are protected from illegal exploitation?

The international trade in wildlife

Every year, hundreds of millions of plants and animals are harvested from the wild and traded globally to supply the widespread demand for traditional medicines, food, luxury items, exotic pets, and plant cultivation. To ensure this trade does not threaten the survival of plant and animal species in the wild, 184 States are parties to an international agreement known as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Over 39,000 species are currently covered by CITES trade controls, listed in three different Appendices, according to the degree of protection they need.

However, CITES-listed species are only a fraction (approximately 0,4%) of the 8.7 million wild plants and animals in existence. As a result, the vast majority of the global wildlife trade concerns species currently not listed under CITES1

Non-CITES-listed wildlife species

To date, no international regulatory framework exists to monitor the trade of plant and animal species not listed in the CITES appendices2. There are no species-specific reporting mechanisms in place to track the volumes, trends, or routes for non-CITES species 3. As a result, documentation of international trade in non-CITES species is generally poor, and available data on legal trade in these species is limited and irregular4

However, a lack of data does not mean a lack of trade – be it legal or illegal. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), “millions of species that are not listed by CITES may be illegally harvested and traded internationally”5 And the situation seems to be escalating: in 2022, Europol reported that, due to growing controls, European traffickers are increasingly targeting less monitored endemic non-CITES listed species, especially birds, trafficked from Europe to Africa 6

The shortcomings of the current legal framework

The absence of an international regulatory framework for the trade of non-CITES species leaves millions vulnerable to overexploitation – even species that are nationally protected in their country of origin. In fact, non-CITES species that are harvested in violation of the national laws of their country of origin can often be legally imported and traded in their destination country. Despite these specimens being the product of illegal activities in their source countries, once they are successfully exported, transit or destination countries often do not have the legal mechanisms to recognise that taint of illegality7. Going back to our initial example, the Sumatran Laughingthrush is nationally protected in its source country (Indonesia), but it is not listed under CITES, nor is it protected under the EU wildlife trade regulations. Therefore, under current international and European regulations, once it has illegally entered the EU, it can legally be traded within the Union. This is because enforcement authorities within the EU, as well as in most other States8, currently do not have a legal basis to seize illegally sourced species, which are solely protected in their range state, and to prosecute traffickers9

A new global agreement against wildlife trafficking

To address this serious gap in the international legal framework, a number of biodiversity-rich countries, often the source of illicitly traded wildlife, has called for a new global agreement to tackle wildlife trafficking. From May 2021 to February 2022, the presidents of Angola, Costa Rica, Gabon and Malawi publicly called for the adoption of an additional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC), to help tackle cross-border wildlife trafficking through enhanced international cooperation.

Shortly after, in May 2022, the United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (CCPCJ), adopted a landmark Resolution10, initially submitted by Angola, Kenya, and Peru, which formally invites Member States to share their views on a potential additional protocol to the UNTOC.

Such a Protocol could include States agreeing to, inter alia, adopt legislation establishing as a criminal offence the trafficking of any whole or part of a wild animal or plant, whether alive or dead, in violation of an applicable international agreement or any domestic or foreign law11. A Protocol under the UNTOC to prevent and combat trafficking in wildlife would be the first international instrument to create specific obligations for States Parties in this critically important area of criminal law.

Moving forward

The most recent expression of support for a global agreement to tackle wildlife trafficking has come from the EU, in its revised Action Plan against wildlife trafficking of November 202212. As one of the largest markets for illegally traded wildlife and wildlife products, the EU is committed to “promoting the adoption of a protocol covering wildlife trafficking” under the UNTOC. The position of other States on this critically important issue will also be clearer soon: in May 2023, during its 32nd Session, the CCPCJ is expected to share a first, partial report containing States’ views on a possible additional Protocol.

Although the development of a possible new instrument is still in its early stages, and international agreements are notoriously slow to negotiate and implement, discussions in multilateral fora have been encouraging thus far. As CITES continues to play a vital role in protecting internationally traded plant and animal species from overexploitation, an additional Protocol could finally ensure nationally-protected non-CITES-listed, as well as CITES-listed, species find much-needed protection in our international legal framework. 

Alice Pasqualato

Alice Pasqualato

Policy Officer, The Global Initiative to End Wildlife Crime

1. CITES Secretariat. (2022). World Wildlife Trade Report 2022. https://cites.org/sites/default/files/documents/E-CoP19Inf-24.pdf

2. Watters, F., Stringham, O., Shepherd, C. R., Cassey, P. (2022). The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty. Conservation Biology, 36(6). https:// doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13978

3. Andersson, A. A., Tilley, H. B., Lau, W., Dudgeon, D., Bonebrake, T. C., Dingle, C. (2021). CITES and beyond: illuminating 20 years of global, legal wildlife trade. Global Ecology and Conservation, 26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. gecco.2021.e01455

4. Janssen, J., Shepherd, C. R. (2018). Challenges in documenting trade in non-cites-listed species: a case study on crocodile skins. Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity, 11(4), 476–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2018.09.003

5. UNODC. (2016). World wildlife crime report: trafficking in protected species. https://www.unodc.org/documents/dataand-analysis/wildlife/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2016_ final.pdf

6. Europol. (2022). Environmental crime in the age of climate change. https://www.europol.europa.eu/publications-events/ publications/environmental-crime-in-age-of-climate-change2022-threat-assessment

7. Fromherz, N., Lyman, E. (2021). Learning from Lacey: structural legal collaboration under the proposed UNTOC wildlife crime Protocol. Center for Animal Law Studies. Lewis & Clark. https://law.lclark.edu/live/news/46028-learning-fromlacey-structural-legal

8. A notable exception is the Lacey Act, in the United States, which makes all activities in violation of national laws in the country of origin a criminal and punishable act in the United States.

9. Altherr, S. (2014). Stolen Wildlife – Why the EU needs to tackle smuggling of nationally protected species. Pro Wildlife. https://www.prowildlife.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2014stolen-wildlife-report.pdf

10. Resolution 31/1 of the CCPCJ, titled “Strengthening the international legal framework for international cooperation to prevent and combat illicit trafficking in wildlife”.

11. Scanlon, J. (2020). Form and content of a possible Protocol on the illicit trafficking of wildlife. Global Initiative to End Wildlife Crime. https://endwildlifecrime.org/untoc-wildlifeprotocol/

12. European Commission. (2022). Revision of the EU action plan against wildlife trafficking. https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/ better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12675-Preventingillegal-trade-in-wildlife-revision-of-EU-action-plan_en