Chimps have feelings and thoughts. They should also have rights

譯者: FBC GLOBAL 審譯者: Harry Chen

I'd like to have you look at this pencil.

請大家看看這支鉛筆 －

It's a thing. It's a legal thing.

它是「法律上的物品」；

And so are books you might have or the cars you own.

你們擁有的書本和汽車也一樣，

They're all legal things.

它們全都是「法律上的物品」。

The great apes that you'll see behind me,

你們即將在我背後屏幕上 所看到漂亮的黑猩猩，

they too are legal things.

牠們也是法律上的物品；

Now, I can do that to a legal thing.

此時此刻我可以對 法律上的物品做這種事，

I can do whatever I want to my book or my car.

我可以隨意對我的書、 車子做任何事。

These great apes, you'll see.

你們在螢幕上所看到 這些漂亮的黑猩猩，

The photographs are taken by a man named James Mollison

照片是寫出「詹姆士以及其他黑猩猩」 的詹姆士．莫里森所拍下來的，

who wrote a book called "James & Other Apes."

And he tells in his book how every single one them,

他在書中講訴牠們之中的 每單隻、幾乎每一隻，

almost every one of them, is an orphan

都是看著爸爸、媽媽 在眼前死去的孤兒，

who saw his mother and father die before his eyes.

They're legal things.

牠們是法律上的物品！

So for centuries, there's been a great legal wall

好幾個世紀以來 一直有道法律高牆

that separates legal things from legal persons.

區隔開「法律上的物品」 和「法律上的常人」，

On one hand, legal things are invisible to judges.

牆的一邊 －「法律上的物品」 對法官來說就像空氣一樣，

They don't count in law.

它們在法律裡不算數，

They don't have any legal rights.

它們不具有任何法律所賦予權利、

They don't have the capacity for legal rights.

沒有資格得到該權利 － 牠們是奴隸！

They are the slaves.

On the other side of that legal wall are the legal persons.

牆的另一邊是「法律上的常人」，

Legal persons are very visible to judges.

「法律上的常人」對法官來說是具體的、

They count in law.

在法律裡是算數的；

They may have many rights.

他們可能擁有多項權利、

They have the capacity for an infinite number of rights.

有取得無數權利的能力，

And they're the masters.

而且他們是主子！

Right now, all nonhuman animals are legal things.

此時此刻全部的非人類動物 都是法律上的物品、

All human beings are legal persons.

所有人類都是「法人」；

But being human and being a legal person

不過成為常人而且是法人，

has never been, and is not today, synonymous with a legal person.

從來不曾是、在今天也不是 與法人有相同涵義的，

Humans and legal persons are not synonymous.

人類不等同法人！

On the one side,

高牆的一邊

there have been many human beings over the centuries

長達好幾個世紀以來有許多人類

who have been legal things.

一向都是法律上的物品，

Slaves were legal things.

奴隸是法律上的物品、

Women, children, were sometimes legal things.

女人、孩童有時候也是法律上的物品。

Indeed, a great deal of civil rights struggle over the last centuries

確確實實長達過去好幾個 世紀以來大量的民權抗爭

has been to punch a hole through that wall and begin to feed

已經在這道高牆上打穿了一個洞， 而且開始把這些人送過高牆去，

these human things through the wall and have them become legal persons.

把他們變成了法人。

But alas, that hole has closed up.

唉呀！不過那個洞已被關上了，

Now, on the other side are legal persons,

牆的另一邊是法人，

but they've never only been limited to human beings.

但是他們從來不是只侷限於人類，

There are, for example, there are many legal persons who are not even alive.

例如有許多法人甚至不是活著的東西。

In the United States,

在美國我們都清楚公司是法人的事實；

we're aware of the fact that corporations are legal persons.

In pre-independence India,

在獨立前的印度有個法庭認定 一尊印度神像是法人、

a court held that a Hindu idol was a legal person,

that a mosque was a legal person.

一間清真寺是法人，

In 2000, the Indian Supreme Court

在 2000 年時印度最高法院

held that the holy books of the Sikh religion was a legal person,

裁定錫克教的聖典是法人；

and in 2012, just recently,

而就在最近的 2012 年

there was a treaty between the indigenous peoples of New Zealand

紐西蘭原住民和君權政府之間的公約

and the crown, in which it was agreed that a river was a legal person

認可了一條河流是法人，

who owned its own riverbed.

它擁有著自己的河床。

Now, I read Peter Singer's book in 1980,

我在 1980 年時拜讀過 「彼得．辛格」的著作，

when I had a full head of lush, brown hair,

當時我有著滿頭茂盛的棕髮，

and indeed I was moved by it,

而深深被這本書感動，

because I had become a lawyer because I wanted to speak for the voiceless,

因為我成為律師就是為了 來替弱勢者出聲、

defend the defenseless,

為無力辯護的人來辯護；

and I'd never realized how voiceless and defenseless the trillions,

而我從來不知道 有多如牛毛的非人類動物

billions of nonhuman animals are.

是沒有聲音的、無力辯護的，

And I began to work as an animal protection lawyer.

於是我開始當護守動物權利的律師。

And by 1985, I realized that I was trying to accomplish something

到了 1985 年我意識到 自己正嘗試在做某種

that was literally impossible,

根本不可能成功的事，

the reason being that all of my clients,

理由就是我的所有客戶 －

all the animals whose interests I was trying to defend,

所有我正在捍衛其權利的動物

were legal things; they were invisible.

都是法律上的物品、被當成空氣一般！

It was not going to work, so I decided

這根本行不通的，

因此我做出決定唯一的方法是 牠們必須 － 至少有些動物 －

that the only thing that was going to work was they had, at least some of them,

had to also be moved through a hole that we could open up again in that wall

也得一樣穿過我們在法律高牆上 再度打開的孔洞，

and begin feeding the appropriate nonhuman animals through that hole

開始將合適的非人類動物送過這孔洞

onto the other side of being legal persons.

去到身為法人的另一邊去。

Now, at that time, there was very little known about or spoken about

在那時候後有關實切動物的權力

truly animal rights,

所知不多、談論也少，

about the idea of having legal personhood or legal rights for a nonhuman animal,

有關於讓非人類動物擁有法人身分 或是法律上之權力的概念，

and I knew it was going to take a long time.

因此我知道這條路很漫長。

And so, in 1985, I figured that it would take about 30 years

所以在 1985 年時 我以為會花上三十年的時間，

before we'd be able to even begin a strategic litigation,

我們才會有辦法幾乎發起一樁 策略性訴訟、長期抗爭，

long-term campaign, in order to be able to punch another hole through that wall.

為了能夠在法律的高牆上打穿另一個洞，

It turned out that I was pessimistic, that it only took 28.

結果證明我太悲觀了 － 這只花了 28 年。

So what we had to do in order to begin was not only

為了要開始我們必須做的不只是

to write law review articles and teach classes, write books,

寫寫法律評論文章、開課或出書而已，

but we had to then begin to get down to the nuts and bolts

而且我們得接著開始認真專注於

of how you litigate that kind of case.

要如何提起爭訟的具體細節。

So one of the first things we needed to do was figure out what a cause of action was,

因此首要之事裡面有一件 便是釐清事由 －

a legal cause of action.

法律上的訴訟事由，

And a legal cause of action is a vehicle that lawyers use

訴訟事由是律師在法官面前 用來表達論點的方法。

to put their arguments in front of courts.

It turns out there's a very interesting case

結果有個非常值得玩味的案子，

that had occurred almost 250 years ago in London called Somerset vs. Stewart,

發生在約 250 年前的倫敦， 被稱做「桑莫塞特與史都華爭訟」，

whereby a black slave had used the legal system

藉此一位黑人奴隸利用了司法的體制

and had moved from a legal thing to a legal person.

從法律上的東西轉變成為法人！

I was so interested in it that I eventually wrote an entire book about it.

我對該案件深感興趣， 我最終還為此寫了一整本書。

James Somerset was an eight-year-old boy when he was kidnapped from West Africa.

詹姆斯．桑默塞特在西非 遭到綁架時年僅八歲，

He survived the Middle Passage,

他熬過了「中央航線」，

and he was sold to a Scottish businessman named Charles Stewart in Virginia.

以及在維吉尼亞州被賣給一名 蘇格蘭商人查爾斯．史都華。

Now, 20 years later, Stewart brought James Somerset to London,

20 年後查爾斯帶著詹姆斯去到倫敦，

and after he got there, James decided he was going to escape.

到倫敦後詹姆斯便決定要脫逃。

And so one of the first things he did was to get himself baptized,

所以他所做的第一件事便是受洗，

because he wanted to get a set of godparents,

目的是為了得到一對教父、母；

because to an 18th-century slave,

對一個十八世紀的奴隸來說

they knew that one of the major responsibilities of godfathers

他們知道教父的一個重責大任 就是幫助你脫逃。

was to help you escape.

And so in the fall of 1771,

而在 1771 年的秋天，

James Somerset had a confrontation with Charles Stewart.

詹姆斯和查爾斯起了衝突，

We don't know exactly what happened, but then James dropped out of sight.

我們也不知道到底是發生了什麼事， 不過後來詹姆斯消失不見了。

An enraged Charles Stewart then hired slave catchers

盛怒的查爾斯隨後雇用了 獵奴人查訪倫敦市，

to canvass the city of London,

find him, bring him not back to Charles Stewart,

找出他、帶他回泊留在倫敦港的 「安與瑪莉號」船上

but to a ship, the Ann and Mary, that was floating in London Harbour,

而非帶回給查爾斯；

and he was chained to the deck,

而且他被鏈鎖在甲板上，

and the ship was to set sail for Jamaica

該船預定要航向牙買加，

where James was to be sold in the slave markets

在那裡詹姆斯即將在奴隸市場被賣掉，

and be doomed to the three to five years of life that a slave had

他被註定了奴隸在牙買加會有的日子 三到五年裡不停收割甘蔗。

harvesting sugar cane in Jamaica.

Well now James' godparents swung into action.

不錯，當下詹姆斯的教父、母 迅速有所行動，

They approached the most powerful judge,

找上了最權威的法官 －

Lord Mansfield, who was chief judge of the court of King's Bench,

「曼斯菲爾德」大法官， 其為「王座法庭」的首席法官。

and they demanded that he issue a common law writ of habeus corpus

他們代表詹姆士要求他簽發 人身保護令普通法傳票。

on behalf of James Somerset.

Now, the common law is the kind of law that English-speaking judges can make

普通法是當未被法令或是憲法所納入

when they're not cabined in by statutes or constitutions,

英語系國家的法官可以 制訂法條的法律；

and a writ of habeus corpus is called the Great Writ,

而人身保護令傳票叫做「大令狀」，

capital G, capital W,

and it's meant to protect any of us who are detained against our will.

旨在保護我們誰違反自身意願 遭受拘禁的任何人。

A writ of habeus corpus is issued.

一旦人身保護令傳票被簽發，

The detainer is required to bring the detainee in

拘禁人受命帶來受拘禁者到庭上

and give a legally sufficient reason for depriving him of his bodily liberty.

並且給出剝奪其身體自由 在法律上的充分理由。

Well, Lord Mansfield had to make a decision right off the bat,

好了，曼斯菲爾德大法官必須 即刻做出決定，

because if James Somerset was a legal thing,

因為詹姆士是「法律上的物品」

he was not eligible for a writ of habeus corpus,

他不合乎於人身保護令傳票的用途，

only if he could be a legal person.

除非他可以是個法人。

So Lord Mansfield decided that he would assume,

所以曼斯菲爾德大法官決定 － 他將會假定而不是裁定

without deciding, that James Somerset was indeed a legal person,

詹姆斯確實是個法人，

and he issued the writ of habeus corpus, and James's body was brought in

他簽發了人身保護令傳票， 詹姆士人就被該船船長帶來法庭上。

by the captain of the ship.

There were a series of hearings over the next six months.

接下來六個月內有一連串的聽證會。

On June 22, 1772, Lord Mansfield said that slavery was so odious,

1772 年 6 月 22 日曼斯菲爾德 大法官直言奴隸制度是如此醜惡，

and he used the word "odious,"

他用了「醜惡」這個字眼，

that the common law would not support it, and he ordered James free.

這下普通法不會再助長它的， 他發出釋放詹姆士的命令。

At that moment, James Somerset underwent a legal transubstantiation.

在那一刻詹姆斯經歷了法律上的轉形，

The free man who walked out of the courtroom

走出法庭這個自由的男人

looked exactly like the slave who had walked in,

看起來和走進法庭的奴隸完全相像，

but as far as the law was concerned, they had nothing whatsoever in common.

不過就法律層面而言 他倆已經沒有任何相同之處了。

The next thing we did is that the Nonhuman Rights Project,

我所成立的 「非人類權利專案」 所做的下一件事情是

which I founded, then began to look at what kind of values and principles

接著開始著眼於我們想放在法官面前的 是什麼樣的價值觀和原則，

do we want to put before the judges?

What values and principles did they imbibe with their mother's milk,

哪些價值觀和原則 對他們來說再自然不過？

were they taught in law school, do they use every day,

在法學院裡有上過？每天都會用到？ 他們打從心底相信？

do they believe with all their hearts -- and we chose liberty and equality.

而我們選中「自由」和「平等」。

Now, liberty right is the kind of right to which you're entitled

如今自由之權是那種因為 你的外觀所被賦予的權利，

because of how you're put together,

and a fundamental liberty right protects a fundamental interest.

而基本的自由權保護基本的利益。

And the supreme interest in the common law

普通法至高的利益

are the rights to autonomy and self-determination.

是自主和自決的權力。

So they are so powerful that in a common law country,

所以這兩種權利非常強大，

if you go to a hospital and you refuse life-saving medical treatment,

在普通法國家要是你進了醫院 而拒絕了保命的醫療救治，

a judge will not order it forced upon you,

法官不會下令使其強加於你身上，

because they will respect your self-determination and your autonomy.

因為他們會尊重你的自決和自主權。

Now, an equality right is the kind of right to which you're entitled

平等權是那種因為你很某人在有關方面

because you resemble someone else in a relevant way,

看起來很相像而你所被賦予的權利，

and there's the rub, relevant way.

這裡有一個關卡 － 相關方面；

So if you are that, then because they have the right, you're like them,

所以要是你是那樣， 然後因為他們有權利、你和他們相像，

you're entitled to the right.

你就被賦予了該權力。

Now, courts and legislatures draw lines all the time.

如今法院和立法機構 不時劃分出界限，

Some are included, some are excluded.

有些人被包含在內、有些人排除在外。

But you have to, at the bare minimum you must --

但是在最低限度你一定要、你得要 －

that line has to be a reasonable means to a legitimate end.

那條線對合法性的目標來說 得要是合理的方式，

The Nonhuman Rights Project argues that drawing a line

「非人類權利專案」 據理說明：畫出一條線

in order to enslave an autonomous and self-determining being

就為了宰制像你所看到在我背後螢幕上 有自主和自決力的生物，

like you're seeing behind me,

that that's a violation of equality.

那是違背了平等權。

We then searched through 80 jurisdictions,

然後我們找遍80個司法管轄區，

it took us seven years, to find the jurisdiction

花費了七年的時間，

where we wanted to begin filing our first suit.

找出我們要提出第一個 訴案的司法管轄地，

We chose the state of New York.

我們選擇了紐約。

Then we decided upon who our plaintiffs are going to be.

然後我們選定了誰將會是 原告 － 黑猩猩，

We decided upon chimpanzees,

not just because Jane Goodall was on our board of directors,

不僅因為「珍．古德」 當時是我們董事會的成員，

but because they, Jane and others,

更是因為珍和其他人已經扎實地 研究黑猩猩幾十年了。

have studied chimpanzees intensively for decades.

We know the extraordinary cognitive capabilities that they have,

我們已經知道黑猩猩具有 驚人的認知能力、

and they also resemble the kind that human beings have.

他們的身體構造也和人類相像，

And so we chose chimpanzees, and we began to then canvass the world

所以我們選擇了黑猩猩； 之後我們開始到世界處探問，

to find the experts in chimpanzee cognition.

要找出黑猩猩認知研究的專家，

We found them in Japan, Sweden, Germany, Scotland, England and the United States,

我們在日本、瑞典、德國、蘇格蘭、 英格蘭和美國找到這些人，

and amongst them, they wrote 100 pages of affidavits

這些人之中寫了 100 頁的書面證詞，

in which they set out more than 40 ways

裡面列出了40多種研究方法，

in which their complex cognitive capability,

其中他們錯綜複雜的認知力 單獨也好、共同也罷，

either individually or together,

all added up to autonomy and self-determination.

全都提升了自主和自決力。

Now, these included, for example, that they were conscious.

舉例來說現在這些納進來的 這些非人類動物是有意識的，

But they're also conscious that they're conscious.

而且他們也能意識到 自己是有意識的；

They know they have a mind. They know that others have minds.

他們知道自己有心智、 他們知道其他黑猩猩有心智；

They know they're individuals, and that they can live.

他們知道自己是個體、 而且能夠過日子；

They understand that they lived yesterday and they will live tomorrow.

他們知道自己昨天活著， 而且明天還會活着；

They engage in mental time travel. They remember what happened yesterday.

他們進行心靈的時光之旅， 他們記得昨天發生過的事情、

They can anticipate tomorrow,

他們能夠預測明天。

which is why it's so terrible to imprison a chimpanzee, especially alone.

這是為什麼關住一隻黑猩猩， 尤其是單獨一隻有多麼駭人；

It's the thing that we do to our worst criminals,

這是我們對罪大惡極的人犯所作之事，

and we do that to chimpanzees without even thinking about it.

而我們對黑猩猩們做這檔事 連想都沒有想過這點！

They have some kind of moral capacity.

牠們具有某種良知本能，

When they play economic games with human beings,

牠們和人類進行經濟活動時，

they'll spontaneously make fair offers, even when they're not required to do so.

牠們會自動地做出對等的提案， 儘管沒人要求牠們這麼做。

They are numerate. They understand numbers.

牠們會算數的 － 牠們瞭解數字、

They can do some simple math.

他們能做一些簡單的數學運算；

They can engage in language -- or to stay out of the language wars,

牠們可以進行或是避免語言的爭戰；

they're involved in intentional and referential communication

他們投入於本意的以及指射性的溝通，

in which they pay attention to the attitudes of those

在溝通中會留意牠們正在 講話之對象的態度；

with whom they are speaking.

They have culture.

他們有文化 －

They have a material culture, a social culture.

有實物的文化、社會的文化、

They have a symbolic culture.

還有象徵含意的文化。

Scientists in the Taï Forests in the Ivory Coast

科學家在象牙海岸的塔伊國家森林

found chimpanzees who were using these rocks to smash open

發現正在用石頭敲開 果殼異常堅硬之核果的黑猩猩，

the incredibly hard hulls of nuts.

It takes a long time to learn how to do that,

這花了很長的一段時間來學如何做到，

and they excavated the area and they found

他們挖掘了該地區 而發現這個實物文化，

that this material culture, this way of doing it,

這樣子做事的方法，

these rocks, had passed down for at least 4,300 years

這些石頭已經傳承下來 至少 4,300 年，

through 225 chimpanzee generations.

經歷了 225 代的黑猩猩。

So now we needed to find our chimpanzee.

所以我們需要找出我們的黑猩猩原告，

Our chimpanzee,

首先我們在紐約找到兩隻，

first we found two of them in the state of New York.

Both of them would die before we could even get our suits filed.

兩隻都會在我們第一次提交 訴訟之前就死掉；

Then we found Tommy.

後來我們找到了「湯米」，

Tommy is a chimpanzee. You see him behind me.

湯米是一隻黑猩猩， 大家看牠就在我背後的螢幕上，

Tommy was a chimpanzee. We found him in that cage.

湯米當初是一隻黑猩猩， 我們在籠子裏找到了牠，

We found him in a small room that was filled with cages

我們在一個塞滿籠子 的小房間裡發現他的，

in a larger warehouse structure on a used trailer lot in central New York.

就在紐約中央曾經用來當拖車場的 一間大型倉儲建物裡。

We found Kiko, who is partially deaf.

我們還找到了「濟科」， 他有一邊的耳朵聾掉了。

Kiko was in the back of a cement storefront in western Massachusetts.

濟科當時在麻省西部 一排水泥鄰街店舖的後方；

And we found Hercules and Leo.

我們找到了「赫裘里斯」和「李奧」。

They're two young male chimpanzees

他們是兩隻年輕的雄性黑猩猩，

who are being used for biomedical, anatomical research at Stony Brook.

他們正在石溪大學 接受生物醫學、解剖學的研究，

We found them.

我們發現了牠倆。

And so on the last week of December 2013,

然後在 2013 年 12 月的最後一週，

the Nonhuman Rights Project filed three suits all across the state of New York

「非人類權利專案」在全紐約 提交了三起訴訟，

using the same common law writ of habeus corpus argument

利用一樣曾經用在詹姆士．桑莫塞特 案子的一般法人身保護令傳票，

that had been used with James Somerset,

and we demanded that the judges issue these common law writs of habeus corpus.

我們要求法官簽發 普通法人身保護令傳票。

We wanted the chimpanzees out,

我們想要救出這些黑猩猩，

and we wanted them brought to Save the Chimps,

想讓牠們被送去「拯救黑猩猩」，

a tremendous chimpanzee sanctuary in South Florida

那是一個在南佛羅里達州 極棒的黑猩猩庇護地，

which involves an artificial lake with 12 or 13 islands --

包括了一個有著 12、3 個 小島的人工湖，

there are two or three acres where two dozen chimpanzees live

小島面積為二到三畝， 每個小島上住著二十四隻的黑猩猩。

on each of them.

And these chimpanzees would then live the life of a chimpanzee,

這些黑猩猩將會過上 黑猩猩的生活，

with other chimpanzees in an environment that was as close to Africa as possible.

與其他的黑猩猩在一個 盡可能接近西非的環境，

Now, all these cases are still going on.

至今所有的案件仍在審理中，

We have not yet run into our Lord Mansfield.

我們尚未巧遇到 我們的曼斯菲爾德大法官，

We shall. We shall.

我們應該會碰到的，

This is a long-term strategic litigation campaign. We shall.

這是一場長期戰略性的訴訟戰役， 我們應該會碰上的啦。

And to quote Winston Churchill,

引用「溫斯頓．邱吉爾」的說法 ，

the way we view our cases is that they're not the end,

我們看待自己訴案的方式 － 它們並非是個結束，

they're not even the beginning of the end,

甚至不是結束的開端，

but they are perhaps the end of the beginning.

不過它們也許是一個開端的結束。

Thank you.

謝謝大家！

(Applause)

（掌聲）