Interviewing Animal Advocate – Samuel March of 9 Kings Bench Walk

ARTICLE

Interviewing Animal Advocate – Samuel March of 9 Kings Bench Walk

Samuel March

Samuel was called to the Bar in 2020 and is a criminal and regulatory barrister at 9 King’s Bench Walk. He also trades as Hemp & Hemp, selling the world’s first plant-based barristers’ wigs. Samuel graduated from The University of Law following completion of his GDL and BPTC. Samuel has been an animal advocate since childhood and now is taking his passion into his career. He kindly provided his thoughts in the interview below on all things animal law.

Where did your passion for animals and their relationship with the law begin?

I have always loved animals. One of my earliest happy memories was going to a shelter with my parents to adopt a cat when I was very young. Over the course of my life, I have fostered or adopted a menagerie of cats, dogs and rabbits.

What challenges have you faced as an animal advocate in your legal career so far?

There are a combination of general challenges and personal challenges. The general challenges mainly arise from being an animal advocate in a legal system where animals have no rights. Animals in England & Wales are mere property, or chattels. They are not considered legal persons and they have no standing to enforce any law that protects them.

There are also personal challenges being an animal lawyer in a system where animal products continue to be widely used. In England & Wales barristers still wear wigs and the vast majority of these are still made from horsehair. As a vegan, I oppose all forms of animal exploitation, from gratuitous cruelty like bull fighting or fox hunting, to the industrial-scale cruelty of factory farming, to more subtle forms of cruelty which nevertheless involve the ownership and commodification of animal bodies. Taking hair from a horse to make a wig is at the latter end. Of course, it is conceivable that there are ways this could be taken without immediate physical pain, but that does not mean it is not exploitation. From the outset of my career, I refused to wear a traditional horsehair wig because to purchase one would be to sponsor exploitation. They are expensive items made from animal products, so buying them adds value to the practice of owning horses and selling them for parts.

My solution was to have my own wig made from hemp. After a story about my wig was picked up by various papers, lots of vegans got in touch and asked how to get one. I decided to make them available for order; with a promise that any profits I turn from wig sales will ultimately go to causes that use the law to further animal protection.

How did you tie your interests in law and animals together before being called to the Bar?

Doing the GDL, I found ways to complement my course with extra-curricular activities that provided opportunities to learn about how the law affects animals: I wrote articles for Advocates for Animals’ blog, and I also got involved with the UK Centre for Animal Law, who organise essay competitions, mooting competitions, webinars and conferences.

Have you been able to work on animal advocacy since being called to the Bar?

As a criminal lawyer there are three main practice areas where I use my skills to further animal protection causes: prosecuting animal welfare and wildlife offences; defending allegedly dangerous dogs and representing animal activists charged with criminal offences.

What could domestic legislation be doing better to protect the rights of animals or improve their legal protection?

Nonhuman animal rights will not be properly protected until the law recognises animals as rights bearers, and guarantees such basic rights as the right to life, liberty and freedom from torture.

In the meantime, it would be a positive step forward if the government actually enforced the limited protections that parliament has enacted. A recent joint report by the Animal Law Foundation and Animal Equality reported that although there are nearly 300,000 farms in the UK, an average of only 2.95% of those were inspected by public bodies between 20182021. Meanwhile, over the past five years at least 65 covert investigations have been conducted. In every case some form of illegality was witnessed, including direct cruelty, untreated lameness, mutilations without anaesthetic, ammonia-caused body burns, prolonged suffering at slaughter and more.

If you could change one piece of law relating to animals, what would it be and why?

Setting aside for a moment my grander ambitions of abolition; a small and immediate change I would make would be to repeal the breed specific legislation provisions of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

Under current legislation, if the prosecution allege that a dog is a Pitbull (or other banned breed) then its human companion is guilty of a criminal offence unless the human defendant proves the contrary. Where the human is convicted, the starting point is that the dog will be killed. Proving that the dog is not a banned breed has nothing to do with the dog’s genetics; just whether it has a substantial number of physical characteristics associated with a banned breed.

It is legislation has been vocally opposed by animal protection and dog charities across the board. It is unsupported by scientific evidence, the list of banned breeds is arbitrary, and it reverses the presumption of innocence and burden of proof in a way that makes a mockery of the golden thread that is supposed to run through our criminal justice system.

What is one documentary, book or podcast you would recommend as a source to learn about issues impacting animals?

The UK Centre for Animal Law’s “Talking Animal Law Podcast” is a great place to start; as is Advocates for Animals’ blog.