Talking Heads: Judicial Reviews chaos

This article first appeared in the Winter 2020 issue of 'My Countryside' magazine.

James Legge, Head of Political at Countryside Alliance, assesses the Judicial Reviews chaos caused by Wild Justice and its ongoing obsession with shooting.

What is Wild Justice?

Wild Justice was launched in February 2019 by Chris Packham, Mark Avery and Ruth Tingay. It describes itself as "set up to fight for wildlife". The website states that: "threatened species can't take legal cases in their own names but, with your help, we will stand up for wildlife using the legal system and seeking changes to existing laws". Since 2019 it has launched a number of legal challenges, called Judicial Reviews, against a number of public bodies, throwing much of the management of our precious wildlife into chaos, and putting at risk the survival of those very threatened species, about which they are supposed to be so concerned.

What is Judicial Review?

When an individual or organisation wishes to challenge the lawfulness of a decision by a public authority, this is normally done by a legal process called Judicial Review. This means that the courts are asked to determine whether a public body, including individuals such as ministers, have acted in accordance with the law, and whether decisions have been arrived at according to due process. The court is concerned mainly with whether an action of the public authority was lawful, not in determining the relative merits of the evidence on which a particular decision was reached.

What legal challenges are currently being brought?

It is this process of Judicial Review that Wild Justice is using to challenge wildlife licences issued by Natural England and Natural Resources Wales. They are also challenging the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) over the release of game birds on, or near, protected sites. The resulting chaos has exposed weaknesses in the current wildlife licensing system, but it has also revealed that Wild Justice seem to care little about the devastating consequences of their actions on wildlife, people and the rural economy. Wild Justice challenged the three key General Licences on the basis that the condition that "the issuing authority must be satisfied that there are no non-lethal alternatives" had not been met. The licences were duly amended and reissued. No sooner had this happened than Wild Justice challenged both the conditions attached to these licences in Wales, and the application of General Licences on Natura 2000 sites, or within 300m of them, forcing land managers to apply for individual licences.

The failure of Natural England to administer the applications for individual licences in good time meant that for a second year running the management of corvids and gulls on some of our most valuable wildlife sites has been impossible, with dire consequences for red listed species such as curlew. Not content with the mayhem caused around licensing, Wild Justice launched yet another challenge, this time concerning the release of pheasants and partridges on or near European protected sites. Despite Defra agreeing to a review of gamebird releasing, Wild Justice pressed ahead and, at the time of writing, the case was due to be heard in court over two days on the 3rd and 4th November.

Why is the Alliance involved?

The management of wildlife is vital to the future of our countryside, and the recovery of biodiversity which the government is so keen to see. Shooting and its associated management are a key part of that, as well as a vital part of the economic and social fabric of our countryside. Wild Justice has exposed the fact that the current licensing system and the way in which the precautionary principle is understood and applied are both flawed. Our departure from the EU provides an opportunity to put in place a system of wildlife management that both protects and enhances biodiversity, and we must not allow this to be manipulated by animal rights campaigners to the detriment of our wildlife and rural communities. Attacks on shooting are only going to increase and the Alliance, working with other rural organisations, will ensure that these are always robustly challenged.