[ad_1]
SINGAPORE: The case of a dog that was euthanized is currently “pending investigation” by the Animal and Veterinary Service (AVS), Minister for Internal Affairs and Legal Affairs K Shanmugam said on May 13, when he called to members of the public. exercise restraint on the matter.
“There has been a lot of discussion online about Loki, a cub that was euthanized,” Shanmugam said in a Facebook post.
“This particular issue is pending investigation by AVS, which should be able to do its job without public pressure, one way or another,” the minister said.
The dog’s euthanasia has attracted widespread public attention in the past week, and netizens expressed anger at Loki’s owners and the vet who humiliated him.
In a Facebook post last week, the exclusively mixed-race non-profit organization said Loki’s owners had sacrificed her for “alleged assault.”
“One of our adopted dogs, Loki, was recently killed by his adopters,” the organization said. “Like most of you, we were (and still are) extremely distressed with his passing.”
The organization said there was a clause in all adoption agreements that the adopted dog must be returned to Exclusively Mongrels if the adopter is unable to care for it.
“This was not the case for Loki,” the organization said, adding that it had filed a report with AVS.
Member of Parliament Louis Ng also responded to the incident, writing in a Facebook post that would address the matter in Parliament.
“I will bring this up in Parliament and ask that steps be taken to ensure that this unnecessary murder ends,” said Mr. Ng. “We must end ‘euthanasia of convenience’. We need stricter regulations.”
“WE MUST GET ALL THE FACTS FIRST”
In his Facebook post on Wednesday, Shanmugam said he could understand why people were upset, but emphasized that it was important to know all the facts about the case and not jump to conclusions.
“I can understand that people are upset and want justice. Nobody likes to see a puppy, full of life, humiliated,” said the minister. “But first we have to get all the facts, understand why the vet in this matter came to a point of view.”
“Drawing conclusions, questioning the veterinarian’s professionalism, without all the facts, is a bit unfortunate.”
Mr. Shanmugam said a senior vet had written to him on the matter.
He expressed “deep concern and concern” about how the professionalism of the vet involved in the matter was questioned, without the vet having an adequate opportunity to defend, Shanmugam said.
In her email, the content of which was shared by the minister in her post, the vet she wrote said that she had been harassed online by former clients and that she had “first-hand experience of the fear and anguish that the clinic had the staff, as well as the vet in question, likely going through. “
Ending a pet’s life is one of the “most difficult parts” of a vet’s job and “one that no vet takes lightly,” he said in the email.
“It is difficult enough having to deal with the emotions of ending a life, without also having to live with the constant fear of being” teased “by people who seek to take matters into their own hands by engaging in cyberbullying,” he added.
In his post, Mr. Shanmugam cautioned that reputations can be damaged and cause “deep distress” in such cases, as noted by the email vet.
“Most of us don’t go out and hit people when we are angry. The same is true online.” “We cannot attack people, when we feel that some injustice has been committed, we cannot simply react and attack, with our emotions, when other people are involved.”
There are ways for justice to be done in case of wrongdoing, Shanmugam said.
“I think many of those who expressed their views were really upset and may not have considered the effect that their cyber comments can have on the targets,” he said. “I hope that we can become a society where people first get the facts and then express our feelings in a way that doesn’t invite more violence.”
