Society cannot remain a passive audience to cruelty: Maneka Gandhi

In a candid conversation that spans 5 decades of advocacy, Maneka Gandhi emerges as India’s foremost champion for animal rights, reflecting on the battles fought from within. As a former Union Minister, she pioneered significant legislation and has experienced both admiration and criticism along the way. Gandhi articulates her profound belief that the moral compass of a society is ultimately measured by how it treats its voiceless creatures.

Q. What initially inspired you to transition from concern to action in animal rights activism?

Advertisement

Maneka: Compassion without action is evil. Feeling concern and doing nothing about it is not a virtue; it is abdication.

Activism was never limited to animal rights alone for me. I have always spoken out when I encountered something wrong, whether it concerned animals, women, the environment, or social justice. When the heart opens, it does not open selectively. It opens to suffering, wherever it exists.

Animal rights became one of the most urgent expressions of this instinct, but the impulse to question injustice was always present. Over time, I have tried to learn how to turn conviction into action and opinion into intervention. Every platform I have been given, as a parliamentarian and as a minister responsible for Women’s Empowerment, Social Justice, Environment, and Animal Welfare, has, as far as possible, been used to raise these concerns and work towards change.

Q. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act has a laughable amount of penalties — even 25 rupees! Why do you think policymakers have been hesitant to implement stricter measures?

Maneka: I do not agree with the assumption that the law was born out of indifference. When the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act was enacted under Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the penalty was ₹50. At that time, it was a meaningful amount. The average monthly income was roughly ₹1,000 to ₹1,500, and the punishment carried deterrent value.

What is laughable today is not the intent of the law, but the failure to revise it. The amendment to strengthen penalties has been pending for far too long. This is not about hesitation; it is about legislative inertia. Laws must evolve with economic reality. In this case, that evolution has been unjustifiably neglected.

Q. Despite the presence of laws, violations remain rampant. Between weak laws and poor enforcement, what is the largest barrier to justice for animals?

Maneka: Enforcement.

The law exists. What fails is its application. Enforcement agencies are often unaware of animal protection laws, dismissive of animal suffering, or simply unwilling to act. This is where justice collapses.

That is why training is critical. My organisation works extensively with judicial academies, police personnel, and government officials. There are clear service conduct rules (Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules) applicable to government employees, under which neglect or willful inaction can and should have consequences. Without informed and accountable enforcement, even the strongest laws remain ornamental.

Q. As the founder of People for Animals (PFA), have you encountered bureaucratic or ideological challenges? What are the core values that drive the organisation?

Maneka: Bureaucratic resistance is routine. Ideological resistance is more entrenched.

The core value of People for Animals is straightforward: every sentient life has value. Animals are living beings with rights. They are not commodities created for human use.

While PFA’s mandate is to eliminate animal abuse at its root, the organisation works across multiple capacities, including wildlife rehabilitation, guided by the understanding that animal welfare is inseparable from the environment. Animal welfare, environmental protection, and human well-being are inseparable. My principle is simple and non-negotiable: Live and help live.

Q. You are a staunch environmentalist. Do you believe there is a framework that can bridge animal protection and environmental sustainability?

Maneka: They are not separate movements. They never were.

Animal protection and environmental sustainability are branches of the same tree. You cannot destroy habitats, poison water bodies, empty forests, and still claim to care about animals or the planet.

Animals are not incidental to ecosystems; they are foundational to them. Every act of environmental destruction is also an act of violence against animals. Any framework that treats these concerns as separate is intellectually dishonest. Protecting animals is not an adjunct to environmentalism; it is environmentalism in practice.

Q. Do you think our education system requires foundational reforms to foster empathy toward animals?

Maneka: Without question.

Compassion must be taught, and it must be taught early. Our education system prioritises competition and achievement while neglecting empathy and responsibility. When children are not taught to respect life during their formative years, cruelty becomes normalised.

Kindness towards animals is not an optional value; it is a civilisational one. Children who grow up learning compassion grow into adults who respect life in all its forms. Without this foundation, laws and enforcement will always be corrective rather than preventive.

Q. In collaboration with the Film Federation of India, you organised the inaugural ‘Cinekind’ event. Do you see the FFI, under Firdausul Hassan’s presidency, becoming a long-term partner with PFA in championing animal rights?

Maneka: Yes. This is intended as a long-term partnership between People for Animals and the Film Federation of India. Cinekind will be held every year on 4 October, which is World Animal Day.

Cinema shapes consciousness. When such an influential medium aligns itself with ethical responsibility, it can effect genuine cultural change. Recognising and rewarding compassion is therefore essential. When ethical treatment of animals is acknowledged and honoured, it sets a standard for the industry. Cinekind exists to make compassion visible, valued, and worthy of recognition within creative spaces.

Q. How do you envision social media shaping the future of animal rights advocacy in India?

Maneka: Social media has radically altered animal rights advocacy. It has exposed cruelty that was once hidden, enabled faster reporting, and made accountability unavoidable. Access to information and evidence has strengthened our ability to intervene decisively.

However, there is also a deeply disturbing misuse of these platforms. Animals are sometimes abused deliberately to generate views and engagement. This is unacceptable. While social media companies must implement and enforce zero-tolerance policies towards animal abuse, responsibility does not end there. It is a social responsibility.

Society cannot remain a passive audience to cruelty. Citizens must report such content, document violations, and bring them to the notice of authorities. Silence, again, becomes complicity. Platforms enable reach, but it is people who create, circulate, and legitimise abuse. Without collective moral accountability, no policy will be sufficient.

Used correctly, social media is an invaluable tool. Used irresponsibly, it becomes an amplifier of cruelty. Its impact depends entirely on intent.

Q. In terms of operational methodologies, how do you believe PETA differs from PFA?

Maneka: I do not believe in comparing organisations working for animals. Each operates within its own context and contributes in its own way. We work together in many cases. We work with all organisations and respect each one, small or big. I want a unionisation to take place for all animal welfare people who work alone: feeders, pet owners, activists, animal groups … anyone who believes that animals have rights and need welfare. This year, I am working to develop 780 leaders for 780 districts who will do this unionisation. Each district – whether in Sikkim, Coimbatore, or even Kerala has a minimum of 10,000 such people. But because they do not come together, they are seen as vulnerable. In actual fact, this is a huge movement that will show its strength the minute the bonding starts.

In a country as large and complex as India, animal welfare requires multiple approaches: advocacy, rescue, legal intervention, education, and systemic reform. What matters is not comparison, but cumulative impact. Animals benefit when organisations work towards the same objective, even if their methods differ.