Some of the ivory tusks seized at Pasir Panjang Scanning Station in March 2018 (Image by AVA/ICA)

The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) is seeking feedback from the public on whether to totally ban ivory sale in Singapore.

The month long public consultation (27 Nov to 27 Dec) was launched on Tuesday to gather insight about the public’s thoughts on the AVAs proposed total ban on local elephant ivory sale under the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act.

Currently, Singapore has banned all international trade on elephant ivory products since 1990 under the Convention on International Trade and Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). But trade of ivory products is still permitted domestically if traders can prove that their products were acquired before 1990 prior to the inclusion of relevant elephant species in CITES.

If a total ban is enforced, no one will be allowed to trade any form of elephant ivory product in Singapore, regardless of when it was acquired. Public displays of ivory will also not be allowed with the exception of educational purposes like in zoos and museums.

Back in August, the ivory debate was rekindled when an online store popped up appearing to sell jewellery and accessories made with pre-1990 ivory. The public was aghast and furious – calling for the store to be shut down and for the sale of ivory to be banned completely. It was later revealed to be a part of an awareness campaign by the World Wife Fun for Nature (WFF) about the shortcomings of local wildlife protection laws.

CITES has also been urging participating countries to consider banning domestic trade as well, with countries like China, Hong Kong, the United States and the United Kingdom taking stricter action against the domestic trade of elephant ivory.

So it appears that the government is now exploring the possibility of a total ban. If implemented, a grace period of up to three years will be given to those affected by the ivory ban to decide what they wish to do with their existing stocks of elephant ivory and ivory products.

“Local businesses and individuals who own ivory can consider keeping, donating, or destroying the ivory,” AVA said.

The public have come out in full agreement of the total ban, echoing their earlier sentiments that this should have been done a long time ago. Many even pointed out the redundancy of asking for public opinion when it’s clear that the majority of the public are behind the ban.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

【防假消息法】本社上诉要求撤回更正指示 遭国家发展部、人力部驳回

本月4日,包括《网络公民》、人民之声党、民主党和Sin Rak Sin Party脸书专页,被国家发展部透过防假消息法办事处,发出更正指示。 当局指本社一篇文章,在描述建屋发展局局长蔡君炫博士的言论有不实陈述。当局称蔡君炫博士,并没有在2018年的一场讲座上,表示我国人口会在2030年达到1000万。 另一方面,卫生部和人力部,在7月5日透过“防假消息法”办公处,对包括本社和主流媒体的单位,发出更正指示。当局指强调人力部在二月份时,并没有如传染病学教授淡马亚所言,劝阻雇主带工人做测试。 本社早前分别对人力部和国家发展部,提出上诉要求撤回更正指示。不过本社已在昨日收到回函,上述两部门都拒绝本社的上诉。 在防假消息法下,当事人不满部长裁决,可以上诉部长。若部长仍拒绝撤回更正指示,还可以向法庭上诉。 淡马亚早前在接受本社访谈的影片中,质疑人力部未咨询医疗专家意见下,劝阻雇主带工人做冠病检测等。 人力部文告则解释,卫生部是在2月初,接到本地医院的通知,指有雇主带工人到医院急诊部,作冠病检测。为此,卫生部、人力部等政府部门,在2月12日和19日发文,劝请雇主不要带健康员工到医院检测,让医疗设施用来照顾身体不适病人。  

上月报导习近平表弟被澳政府调查洗黑钱 华尔街日报记者遭驱出境

《华尔街日报》驻北京记者王春翰签证昨日到期,但中方拒绝为其更新工作签证,致使后者必须离境。而《华尔街日报》发言人也证实此事。 王春翰也是新加坡籍人士,他和澳洲籍记者温友正,在上月合作撰写报导,澳洲当局正调查中国国家主席习近平表弟齐明,是否涉及组织犯罪、洗黑钱和参与中国对澳渗透活动。 王春翰自2014年以来,就成为《华》驻北京记者,报导中国政经课题,此前在2011年在新加坡就加入《华》。他在昨日傍晚就已离开北京,前往香港。 中国外交部发言人早前已驳斥《华》报导捕风捉影、无事实根据。 上述报导指,齐明是澳洲墨尔本皇冠度假集团旗下赌场大赌客。2012年至2013年期间,齐明下注达3900万美元;2015年,他是赌场的前50大客户,预估下注4100万美元。 齐明现年61岁,如今是澳洲公民,据了解前者常张扬与习近平的亲戚关系,不过没有任何资讯显示,习近平有介入、对其表弟进行的活动知情。 《华》引述澳洲官员消息,指澳洲去年通过法案,防止外国影响力干预内政。  

Police queried on 4-year old case involving ex-YPAP member

A member of the public has posted a query with the Singapore…