Leather industry faces brunt of Peta ire

Joseph Vackayil in Chennai

Indian leather industry is facing a grim future for no fault of its own. The uncertainty is not owing to any raw material shortage or absence of demand for finished products in the national and international markets. The $2 billion export industry which employs about 2.5 million people is being victimised, even blackmailed, through the the direct action and pressure tactics of an international organisation, People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) allege leather producers and leather products industry.

They say that Peta has been using animal welfare as an alibi to destroy an industry which is in fact dealing with the refuse of the meat industry, which otherwise would be a major environmental concern. The international organisation’s motives are beyond love for animals because it is not attacking the real offenders, they add.

The executive director of the Council for Leather Exports (CLE), Mr S Audiseshiah in a recent statement says that, ‘‘Peta is not justified in targeting the Indian leather industry. Their actions are damaging the industry and will impact the large work force of around 2.5 million employed by the sector. The constant threat of more severe agitations than before is now amounting to blackmail and holding an industry to ransom for a situation that is beyond its immediate scope and control.’’ Mr MM Hashim chairman, CLE core committee on animal welfare programme, says that ever since Peta began to link leather trade to animal welfare, CLE has been playing a facilitation role in implementing the various animal welfare reforms and laws. However, he adds that,‘‘while it is important that our current on the ground-effort is sustained, and stepped up, it is clearly going to be beyond the scope of CLE to depend purely on this direct approach to reform. Without immediate and active Government action the reform programme is likely to hit roadblock’’.

Peta had kicked off its anti-Indian leather campaign in January 2000 and had forced several leading European and American department stores not to sell Indian leather products. The lost trade is over Rs 150 crore and the figure is sure to bulge, as India’s major clients are among the international retailers that are refusing to buy Indian leather and products fearing Peta wrath. Some of them are: Gap Inc., Marks & Spencer, J Crew, Florsheim, LL Bean, Eddie Bauer, Casual Corner and Timberland. The organisation which kept its campaign in abeyance for some time had resumed it in May 2001 and has lined up a series of protest action in several countries. A release from the organisation’s office in Mumbai says, ‘‘Stepping up its campaign against the cruel leather trade in India, Peta is holding worldwide protest urging consumers and retailers alike to shun Indian skins until the Government takes steps to enforce animal protection laws’’.

Among the cities chosen for direct action are Atlanta in the US and Offenbach in Germany, where large buyers of leather products assemble for North American Shoe and Accessory Market and Internationale Lederwaremesse Leather fair, respectively. In early August Peta agitators had held demonstrations at the Shoe Show in Las Vegas. In all these places they are showing what they call ‘‘graphic details about India’s leather industry’’. CLE which has been forced to defend the leather trade from the Peta onslaught has been running from pillar to post to awaken the law enforcement agencies and the Government to implement the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and to make necessary amendments if the Act is not powerful enough to tackle the offenders.

According to Mr Audiseshiah what Peta presents as graphic details of leather trade has in fact nothing to do with leather industry. CLE or leather industry cannot be held responsible for all that is happening to animals during transportation or in abattoirs. He says that, ‘‘Animal welfare is clearly a national issue, which will have to be dealt with by the Government. For its part, irrespective of Peta actions, CLE will continue to play an active and facilitating role in the reform programme’’.