<p>在菲律宾北部，一只宠物狗被杀事件引发了广泛的愤怒，并重新引发了关于该国动物福利保护薄弱的辩论，此事件的令人不安的视频在网上迅速传播。\n 视频显示，一只名为 Axle 的美国斗牛犬在山区省的偏远小镇 Sadanga 被用木板殴打，这引发了动物爱好者的悲痛和对当局加强《动物福利法》执行的呼声。\n 闭路电视画面捕捉到这只狗在哀鸣并试图逃跑，而一名男子则追赶并多次击打它，最终导致它因伤重而死。\n 袭击发生在 12 月 4 日，最初在 YouTube 上发布，但在 TikTok 和 Facebook 上的转发使得视频迅速传播，几小时内便吸引了数千次观看。\n\n 几天内，动物福利组织和地方新闻页面在社交媒体上发布的#JusticeForAxle 帖子迅速传播，使这一案件成为全国新闻。\n 随后，Sadanga 地方政府要求一家在线媒体删除视频的截图在网上流传，理由是该材料 “造成了不必要的痛苦”。\n 最初的报告将袭击者命名为现任镇议员，进一步激怒了公众，但市政官员在核实该说法后发布了澄清。\n“我们对名为 Axle 的美国斗牛犬的无意义杀戮表示明确谴责，” Sadanga 政府在周二的声明中表示。“我们确认对肇事者的案件正在进行中，他是地方政府单位的一名司机。”\n 关于 Axle 的主人接受和解的说法在网上传播，促使一些用户呼吁公众 “放下” 此事件。\n 动物福利组织拒绝了这种呼吁，强调任何金钱和解并不消除《动物福利法》下的刑事责任，该法规定杀害动物可处以最高两年监禁和/或高达 100,000 菲律宾比索（约 1,700 美元）的罚款。\n 菲律宾动物福利协会（PAWS）表示正在为 Axle 建立案件，但告诉《亚洲周刊》称，他们被村官和狗的家属 “阻挠”，该组织推测这可能是由于对偏远紧密社区中其他人的报复的恐惧。\n“仅凭闭路电视录像是无法在法庭上成立或被接受的，除非确定其来源并确认其真实性，包括确认未被篡改，” PAWS 在周二发布的声明中表示。\n“我们无法验证任何信息，因为网上流传的所有信息都是转发的，” PAWS 的执行董事安娜·卡布雷拉告诉《亚洲周刊》。\n 她补充说，她的团队在周四派出了两名代表与地方官员交谈，但村领导拒绝提供任何关于嫌疑人的信息，并坚称杀戮是 “他们文化的一部分”。\n 卡布雷拉还表示，目击者拒绝站出来。“他们一直说，他们的土著习俗是，当一只狗在一个人身上撒尿时，应该杀掉这只狗。”\nSadanga 市长罗伯特·瓦纳万告诉 GMA 新闻，当地迷信认为被狗撒尿会带来厄运甚至死亡。\n“也许在他的愤怒中，他在许多人面前做了这件事，” 他说。\n 然而，卡布雷拉指出，这种信仰并不属于法律的豁免范围，法律仅允许经过认证的部落在批准的仪式习俗中杀死狗。\n“这不属于《动物福利法》下的六个例外之一。因此，这种杀戮是非法的，” 她说。\n 卡布雷拉补充说，任何私人和解 “并不消除刑事责任”，因为该罪行是公共罪行。\n 动物王国基金会敦促 Sadanga 的官员 “以 Axle 为重，严格执行法律”，并警告说和解不能凌驾于 “有生命的、有感知的生物” 的法律保护之上。\n“Sadanga 以其强大的传统、团结和尊严而闻名。维护动物福利并不会削弱这些文化价值，而是增强了它们。保护无声者是道德领导力和文化完整性的体现，” 该基金会补充道。\n\n\n‘寒蝉效应’\n 卡布雷拉表示，PAWS 打算追究此案，以在未来的动物犯罪者中产生 “寒蝉效应”，并补充说对动物的残忍行为往往与更广泛的暴力模式交织在一起。\n“在我们看到的许多案例中，对动物施暴的人也是他们社区中的麻烦制造者……暴力是一个循环。打动物的人也容易打其他人。”\n“因此，动物福利组织和人道协会保护我们的社会不陷入暴力之中，” 她说。\n 卡布雷拉表示，Axle 的死亡，以及 PAWS 处理的其他案件，突显了加强《动物福利法》下的惩罚和简化起诉程序的必要性。\n“作为一种犯罪行为，动物虐待案件所需的证据量是超出合理怀疑的证明。有时这很难证明，特别是在忽视的案件中，忽视被定义为未能为动物提供适当的照顾，” 卡布雷拉说，并补充说她的团队看到几起忽视案件被法院驳回。\n 她还呼吁法院施加更严厉的惩罚，指出法律允许法官选择监禁或最高 100,000 比索的罚款，并认为犯罪者应同时受到两者的惩罚。\n 卡布雷拉表示，法律的措辞造成了漏洞，导致犯罪者有时受到的惩罚远低于倡导者认为反映罪行严重性的惩罚。\n 她引用了 Killua 的案例，这是一只去年被打死的金毛寻回犬，其杀手被判有罪，但只被判支付 1,000 比索的罚款，以及 19,000 比索的赔偿金。\n“我们没有预料到，杀死狗的最高罚款为 100,000 比索，法官却只判了 1,000 比索。因此，我们现在试图通过设定最低限度来防止这种情况再次发生，” 她说。</p>

<p>在菲律宾，一只名为 Axle 的宠物狗被残忍杀害，引发了全国范围的愤怒和对加强《动物福利法》执行的呼声。监控录像显示 Axle 被打死，导致社交媒体上广泛发起了寻求正义的运动。尽管当地文化信仰被引用作为辩解，动物福利组织强调此类行为是非法的，并要求采取法律行动。此案件突显了对动物保护法律的严格需求，以及社会中对动物暴力行为的更广泛影响</p>

<p>The killing of a pet dog in the northern Philippines has ignited widespread outrage and reopened debate on the country’s weak animal welfare protections after disturbing footage of the incident went viral online.\nThe video shows an American Bully named Axle being beaten with a wooden plank in the remote town of Sadanga in Mountain Province, prompting an outpouring of grief from animal lovers and a wave of calls for authorities to strengthen enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act.\nClosed-circuit television images captured the dog whimpering and trying to escape as a man chased and struck it repeatedly, before it later died from its injuries.\nThe attack occurred on December 4 and was first posted on YouTube, but reposts on TikTok and Facebook helped the footage spread rapidly, drawing thousands of views within hours.\n\nWithin days, #JusticeForAxle posts from animal welfare groups and local news pages were ricocheting across social media, helping turn the case into a national news story.\nScreenshots later circulated of Sadanga’s local government asking an online media outlet to remove the video, arguing that the material was “causing unnecessary distress”.\nInitial reports naming the assailant as a sitting town councillor added to public outrage, but municipal officials issued a clarification after fact checking the claim.\n“We express our unequivocal condemnation of the senseless killing of the American Bully known as Axle,” the Sadanga government said in a statement on Tuesday. “We confirm that a filing of a case is ongoing against the perpetrator, who is a driver of the local government unit.”\nClaims that Axle’s owners had accepted a settlement circulated online, prompting some users to urge the public to “move on” from the incident.\nAnimal welfare groups rejected such appeals, stressing that any monetary settlement did not extinguish criminal liability under the Animal Welfare Act, which prescribes up to two years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of as much as 100,000 Philippine pesos (US$1,700) for killing an animal.\nThe Philippine Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) said that it was working on building a case for Axle, but told This Week in Asia that it was being “stonewalled” by village officials and the dog’s family, which the organisation speculated might be due to fear of retribution from others in the remote, tight-knit community.\n“CCTV footage on its own will not stand or be admissible in court unless its source is determined and its authenticity is established, including confirmation that it has not been altered,” PAWS said in a statement released on Tuesday.\n“We are not able to verify anything, as everything circulating online is information that has been passed on,” Anna Cabrera, a lawyer and the executive director of PAWS, told This Week in Asia.\nShe added that her group had sent two representatives on Thursday to speak to local officials, but village leaders declined to provide any information on the suspect and insisted that the killing was “part of their culture”.\nCabrera also said witnesses have refused to come forward. “They kept saying that part of their indigenous practice is that when a dog pees on a person, he should kill the dog.”\nSadanga mayor Robert Wanawan told GMA News that local superstition held that being urinated on by a dog brought misfortune or even death.\n“Perhaps in his anger, he was able to do that in front of many people,” he said of the man who killed Axle.\nCabrera noted, however, that such beliefs did not fall under the law’s exemptions, which permit the killing of a dog only as part of an approved ceremonial custom by a certified tribe.\n“It doesn’t belong under any of the six exceptions under the Animal Welfare Act. So the killing is illegal,” she said.\nCabrera added that any private settlement “does not extinguish criminal liability” as the offence was a public crime.\nThe Animal Kingdom Foundation urged Sadanga’s officials to enforce the law “with Axle … firmly in mind” and warned that settlements cannot override legal protections for “living, sentient beings”.\n“Sadanga is known for its strong traditions, unity, and sense of dignity. Upholding animal welfare does not diminish these cultural values but rather strengthens them. Protecting the voiceless is a reflection of moral leadership and cultural integrity,” the foundation added.\n\n\n‘A chilling effect’\nCabrera said PAWS intended to pursue a case to create a “chilling effect on future animal offenders”, adding that cruelty towards animals often intersected with broader patterns of violence.\n“In many cases we’ve seen, people who are violent to animals are also the troublemakers in their community … Violence is a cycle. A person who hits an animal is prone to hitting other people.”\n“So, animal welfare groups and humane societies protect our society from devolving into a violent one,” she said.\nCabrera said Axle’s death, like other cases PAWS had handled, highlighted the need to strengthen penalties under the Animal Welfare Act and make prosecutions more straightforward.\n“As a criminal act, the quantum of evidence needed for animal cruelty cases is proof beyond reasonable doubt. Sometimes it’s very difficult to prove this, particularly in cases such as neglect, which is defined as the failure to provide adequate care for an animal,” Cabrera said, adding that her group has seen several cases of neglect dismissed by the court.\nShe also urged courts to impose tougher penalties, pointing out that the law allows judges to choose either imprisonment or a fine of up to 100,000 pesos, and arguing that offenders should receive both.\nThe way the law was phrased had created loopholes, Cabrera said, with offenders sometimes receiving penalties far lower than what advocates believed reflected the gravity of the offence.\nShe cited the case of Killua, a golden retriever beaten to death last year, whose killer was found guilty but ordered to pay only a 1,000-peso penalty, plus 19,000 pesos in damages.\n“We didn’t expect that it would be taken in such a way that with a maximum of 100,000 pesos for killing a dog, that the judge would just go for 1,000 pesos. So we’re now trying to prevent that from happening again by imposing a minimum,” she said.\n</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在菲律宾北部，一只宠物狗被杀事件引发了广泛的愤怒，并重新引发了关于该国动物福利保护薄弱的辩论，此事件的令人不安的视频在网上迅速传播。\n 视频显示，一只名为 Axle 的美国斗牛犬在山区省的偏远小镇 Sadanga 被用木板殴打，这引发了动物爱好者的悲痛和对当局加强《动物福利法》执行的呼声。\n 闭路电视画面捕捉到这只狗在哀鸣并试图逃跑，而一名男子则追赶并多次击打它，最终导致它因伤重而死。\n 袭击发生在 12 月 4 日，最初在 YouTube 上发布，但在 TikTok 和 Facebook 上的转发使得视频迅速传播，几小时内便吸引了数千次观看。\n\n 几天内，动物福利组织和地方新闻页面在社交媒体上发布的#JusticeForAxle 帖子迅速传播，使这一案件成为全国新闻。\n 随后，Sadanga 地方政府要求一家在线媒体删除视频的截图在网上流传，理由是该材料 “造成了不必要的痛苦”。\n 最初的报告将袭击者命名为现任镇议员，进一步激怒了公众，但市政官员在核实该说法后发布了澄清。\n“我们对名为 Axle 的美国斗牛犬的无意义杀戮表示明确谴责，” Sadanga 政府在周二的声明中表示。“我们确认对肇事者的案件正在进行中，他是地方政府单位的一名司机。”\n 关于 Axle 的主人接受和解的说法在网上传播，促使一些用户呼吁公众 “放下” 此事件。\n 动物福利组织拒绝了这种呼吁，强调任何金钱和解并不消除《动物福利法》下的刑事责任，该法规定杀害动物可处以最高两年监禁和/或高达 100,000 菲律宾比索（约 1,700 美元）的罚款。\n 菲律宾动物福利协会（PAWS）表示正在为 Axle 建立案件，但告诉《亚洲周刊》称，他们被村官和狗的家属 “阻挠”，该组织推测这可能是由于对偏远紧密社区中其他人的报复的恐惧。\n“仅凭闭路电视录像是无法在法庭上成立或被接受的，除非确定其来源并确认其真实性，包括确认未被篡改，” PAWS 在周二发布的声明中表示。\n“我们无法验证任何信息，因为网上流传的所有信息都是转发的，” PAWS 的执行董事安娜·卡布雷拉告诉《亚洲周刊》。\n 她补充说，她的团队在周四派出了两名代表与地方官员交谈，但村领导拒绝提供任何关于嫌疑人的信息，并坚称杀戮是 “他们文化的一部分”。\n 卡布雷拉还表示，目击者拒绝站出来。“他们一直说，他们的土著习俗是，当一只狗在一个人身上撒尿时，应该杀掉这只狗。”\nSadanga 市长罗伯特·瓦纳万告诉 GMA 新闻，当地迷信认为被狗撒尿会带来厄运甚至死亡。\n“也许在他的愤怒中，他在许多人面前做了这件事，” 他说。\n 然而，卡布雷拉指出，这种信仰并不属于法律的豁免范围，法律仅允许经过认证的部落在批准的仪式习俗中杀死狗。\n“这不属于《动物福利法》下的六个例外之一。因此，这种杀戮是非法的，” 她说。\n 卡布雷拉补充说，任何私人和解 “并不消除刑事责任”，因为该罪行是公共罪行。\n 动物王国基金会敦促 Sadanga 的官员 “以 Axle 为重，严格执行法律”，并警告说和解不能凌驾于 “有生命的、有感知的生物” 的法律保护之上。\n“Sadanga 以其强大的传统、团结和尊严而闻名。维护动物福利并不会削弱这些文化价值，而是增强了它们。保护无声者是道德领导力和文化完整性的体现，” 该基金会补充道。\n\n\n‘寒蝉效应’\n 卡布雷拉表示，PAWS 打算追究此案，以在未来的动物犯罪者中产生 “寒蝉效应”，并补充说对动物的残忍行为往往与更广泛的暴力模式交织在一起。\n“在我们看到的许多案例中，对动物施暴的人也是他们社区中的麻烦制造者……暴力是一个循环。打动物的人也容易打其他人。”\n“因此，动物福利组织和人道协会保护我们的社会不陷入暴力之中，” 她说。\n 卡布雷拉表示，Axle 的死亡，以及 PAWS 处理的其他案件，突显了加强《动物福利法》下的惩罚和简化起诉程序的必要性。\n“作为一种犯罪行为，动物虐待案件所需的证据量是超出合理怀疑的证明。有时这很难证明，特别是在忽视的案件中，忽视被定义为未能为动物提供适当的照顾，” 卡布雷拉说，并补充说她的团队看到几起忽视案件被法院驳回。\n 她还呼吁法院施加更严厉的惩罚，指出法律允许法官选择监禁或最高 100,000 比索的罚款，并认为犯罪者应同时受到两者的惩罚。\n 卡布雷拉表示，法律的措辞造成了漏洞，导致犯罪者有时受到的惩罚远低于倡导者认为反映罪行严重性的惩罚。\n 她引用了 Killua 的案例，这是一只去年被打死的金毛寻回犬，其杀手被判有罪，但只被判支付 1,000 比索的罚款，以及 19,000 比索的赔偿金。\n“我们没有预料到，杀死狗的最高罚款为 100,000 比索，法官却只判了 1,000 比索。因此，我们现在试图通过设定最低限度来防止这种情况再次发生，” 她说。</p>
</div>

菲律宾发生的残忍狗杀事件引发了公众的愤怒，并呼吁加强动物福利法