In 2019, a dog named “Mi Xue” was brutally abused, resulting in multiple fractures— a case that shocked the city. However, the abuser was ultimately sentenced to only community service. This incident became a catalyst for pushing for legislative amendments, yet two years later, the promised new law remains far off.

In 2021, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) received 256 reports of animal cruelty, but only 15 successful prosecutions were recorded that year, yielding a prosecution rate of less than 6%. Behind this glaring figure lies a two-year legislative void since the government announced plans to amend the Animal Cruelty Prevention Ordinance (Chapter 169), along with the harsh reality that countless animals have failed to receive the necessary protection under outdated laws.

The government has stated its aim to “complete the legislative work as soon as possible,” but by the end of 2021, the amendment draft had still not been submitted for review by the Legislative Council. This legislative delay is causing more animals to pay the price.

• Two Years of Stagnation: From Public Consultation to Legislative Standstill From October to November 2019, the AFCD conducted a month-long public consultation regarding the amendment to the Animal Cruelty Prevention Ordinance. The societal response was enthusiastic, receiving over ten thousand submissions, the overwhelming majority of which supported significantly increasing penalties and introducing advanced concepts like “Duty of Care.” The consultation document clearly stated that the goals of the amendment included enhancing deterrence, introducing proactive “Duty of Care” to prevent abuse, and strengthening enforcement powers.
  
  At that time, the signals from the government were positive, and society generally expected the legislative process to proceed quickly. However, from 2020 to 2021, the amendment work seemed to become mired in a quagmire. Despite ongoing inquiries from various sectors, including Legislative Council members, animal welfare organizations, and the general public, government responses remained vague, stating only that they were “fully pushing forward” and “currently drafting,” with no specific timetable forthcoming.
  
  This delay not only erodes public trust but also results in substantive social costs. During the legislative gap from 2019 to 2021, reports of animal abuse did not decrease according to data from the police and AFCD, and the penalties handed down by courts under the old law continued to be perceived as too lenient, failing to reflect societal revulsion toward such crimes. The unfulfilled legislative promise has left animal protection at a low-level equilibrium that does not meet societal progress demands.
  
• The Plight of Old Laws: Why Outdated Regulations Fail to Protect Animals The current core framework of the Animal Cruelty Prevention Ordinance dates back to the last century, and its design lags far behind modern animal welfare concepts. Its greatest flaws lie in its “passivity” and “lag.”
  
  The ordinance mainly punishes extreme acts of “cruelty,” but it has vague definitions for more common issues such as neglect, psychological abuse, or long-term deprivation of welfare, making enforcement difficult. For instance, keeping a dog tied on a short chain for an extended period, lacking social interaction and space to move, may severely impact the animal’s mental health but is hard to classify as “cruelty.”
  
  Additionally, the burden of proof is extremely high, leading to low prosecution success rates. The prosecution must prove that the perpetrator had the subjective intent to “willfully inflict unnecessary suffering,” which is nearly impossible in many cases. Many cases fail to enter judicial procedures due to insufficient evidence or overly broad legal interpretations, or they end up with lenient sentences.
  
  Moreover, penalties are outdated, offering inadequate deterrence. The maximum sentence is three years’ imprisonment and a fine of HKD 200,000, but in practice, very few cases reach these limits. Prior to 2021, numerous instances have shown that offenders are often sentenced to community service, probation, or fines of only a few thousand dollars. This “raise high, lower lightly” judicial reality effectively encourages further abuse.
  
• Core of Reform: Social Consensus and Legislative Focus
  
  Although the amendment draft has yet to appear, there is a high level of consensus on the core direction for reform, primarily focused on three major areas:
  
  • First, introduce “Duty of Care.” This represents a fundamental shift in Hong Kong’s animal welfare legal paradigm, moving from prohibiting “bad actions” to requiring caretakers to “do good.” The law would explicitly state that caregivers must provide appropriate food, environment, medical care, and opportunities for behavioral expression for animals; otherwise, they will be held legally accountable. This could help to prevent numerous cases of potential neglect and welfare deficits from escalating to cruelty.
    
  • Second, substantially increase penalties. There is a strong societal demand for longer prison sentences and higher fines, along with the introduction of additional penalties that are more deterrent, such as lifetime bans on animal ownership or for a specified time. This aims to send a clear message: animal cruelty is a serious crime with severe consequences
    
  • Third, enhance enforcement authority and efficiency. It is recommended to grant enforcement officers (such as AFCD inspectors) the power to enter premises for investigation under reasonable suspicion and to simplify the prosecution process. At the same time, establish better mechanisms for animal rescue and temporary care, ensuring that victim animals can receive timely placement.
    
• Path to Breakthrough: How Civil Society Can Stimulate Legislative Progress In the face of governmental legislative delays, passive waiting is not an option. Hong Kong’s civil society, including animal welfare organizations, professionals, Legislative Council members, and the broader public, can come together to drive the amendment forward in several ways:
  
  • Strategy One: Continuous Collection of Public Opinion and Public Advocacy Systematically gather and organize cases of animal abuse that have occurred since 2019, focusing on those that could not be effectively prosecuted or were lightly sentenced due to legal deficiencies. Create impactful reports or exhibitions and utilize media and social networks to continuously illustrate to the government and the public the costs of the old law’s failures and the urgency of amendment through real stories and data.
    
  • Strategy Two: Seek Cross-Party Support within the Legislative Council
    In 2021, some Legislative Council members have expressed concern about this matter and considered proposing private legislation. Civil society should actively communicate and cooperate with different political parties, especially those on relevant Legislative Council committees, to establish animal welfare amendments as a cross- party livelihood agenda. By utilizing question sessions, debates, and motions within the Legislative Council, exert pressure on the government to provide a specific timetable.
    
  • Strategy Three: Provide Professional and Rational Solutions
    Rather than merely criticizing the delays, offer solutions to the government. Animal welfare groups can collaborate with legal scholars, veterinarians, and behavioral experts to draft a concrete, detailed, and practical “model bill” or legislative suggestions that align with the realities of Hong Kong, referencing mature legal texts from places like the UK and Singapore, and submit these to the relevant government departments and Legislative Council. This approach can lower the legislative technical barriers for the government and showcase the constructive power of civil society
    
  • Strategy Four: Broad Grassroots Petitioning and Voter Power Demonstration Launch a city-wide signature campaign with the goal of collecting signatures from 100,000 citizens or more, demanding that the government fulfill its promise and submit the amendment draft as soon as possible. Publicly submit the signatures and demands to the government headquarters and the Legislative Council. During appropriate political events (e.g., election periods), encourage candidates to clearly express their support for expediting legislative amendments, linking animal welfare issues to voter power.

The law is a reflection of society’s baseline values. A law formulated decades ago that cannot protect animals from suffering is incompatible with Hong Kong’s self-professed image as a civilized and caring international city.

The public consultation in 2019 clearly demonstrated the will of the people, and the statistics of cases in 2021 reveal a harsh reality. Government delays mean that each day, animals suffer the consequences. This is not only a matter of administrative efficiency but also of political will and value choices.

We call on the government to take immediate action, providing a clear legislative timetable and making substantial progress within 2021. At the same time, we urge every citizen concerned about animal welfare to no longer remain silent but to make their voices heard through various channels. Only when society forms an undeniable collective force can we break through bureaucratic inertia and bring this long-promised protection law to the animals who have waited too long.