Horse meat controversy: EU importers hit back with legal action after NGO video claims to expose cruelty

European horse meat importers and animal welfare groups are embroiled in a legal dispute over a short video published online in 2022 that appears to show cruelty toward horses slaughtered in Argentina. Animal welfare groups have reinforced their calls for the European Commission (EC) to stop the import of horse meat from Argentina after a new documentary, published this month, suggests further evidence of cruelty. 

The Belgian Meat Federation FEBEV and Swiss importer Skin Packing are suing the 2022 video’s producers, the German Animal Welfare Foundation (AWF) and Swiss Tierschutzbund Zürich (TSB), claiming the content is defamatory. FEBEV and Skin Packing want the video removed from the internet and monetary compensation.

These civil procedures in Belgium and Switzerland are ongoing, with the next court hearings in December and January.

The more recent footage, said to be taken between 2022 and 2024, documents poor animal welfare in the handling of horses at Argentinian slaughterhouses and assembly centers, and during transport on what the NGOs allege to be “unsuitable” cattle trucks. The NGOs have criticized the EC for not imposing the same measures against Argentina as Mexico and Brazil — countries from which horse meat imports are suspended.

Film’s content disputed

FEBEV spokesperson Michael Gore tells Food Ingredients First that TSB/AWF has been taken to court because “the images used by the NGO, and relayed by others, are misleading: they are either dated, taken out of context/without context or taken in places not connected with the meat industry.”

“They [the images] in no way depict the real situation, generally show little knowledge of the life cycle of a horse in Latin America and have only one aim: to stop horse meat exports from South America to Europe (and, in reality, the total cessation of horse slaughter and consumption of horse meat).”

TSB/AWF tells Food Ingredients First that it strongly refutes FEBEV’s allegations that its images are misleading.

Sabrina Gurtner, project manager at TSB/AWF, says: “As you can see in our films and reports, our investigations are very thorough and detailed, and our reporting is fact-based — we do not claim anything that we cannot prove.”

“Our aim is to stop the import of cruelly produced horse meat from overseas — we do not lobby for a ban on horse slaughter or horse meat consumption, as claimed by FEBEV. For example, following several meetings with us and our partners Welfarm and GAIA, Carrefour recently decided to no longer sell horse meat from South America but to switch to European horse meat instead, where European animal welfare laws apply.”Some French supermarkets still sell horse meat imported from South America despite animal welfare concerns.

Are import bans beneficial?

AWF, TSB and GAIA have been targeting Argentina since 2010 after their investigations suggested that horse meat producers in the country sometimes fail to comply with the EU’s import requirements.

The NGOs flag that EU audits conducted in Argentina identified similar issues regarding food safety and animal welfare. These concerns were confirmed by EU Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi, who said that “the specific issues raised, such as residues of veterinary medicines, animal welfare, illegal cross-border movement and traceability, were all identified during the audits the Commission services have conducted (...)”

FEBEV questions whether an import ban on Argentina would further undermine animal welfare conditions. Gore says: “TSB, AWF and other NGOs forget that once these exports are halted, the slaughter of horses will continue, with no further pressure from Europe to keep high standards for the welfare of horses on the ground, leading to catastrophic situations for the animals, as we have seen in Mexico.”

AWF/TSB says it has wrestled with the question of what would happen to the horses after an import ban but, after thorough consideration, concluded that the positive effects outweigh the possible negative impacts.

“The European importers ignore the fact that they create a demand for horses in the exporting countries and that in Argentina, for example, horses are stolen to meet this demand and, in Canada, they are specifically bred and fattened to meet the demand,” says Gurtner.

“In Argentina, where horse meat consumption is prohibited by law and where stolen horses commonly enter the slaughter pipeline to meet the EU’s demand for horse meat, an import ban can be expected to not only reduce animal suffering but also significantly reduce horse theft.”

“In Mexico, the internal market for horse meat has existed even before the EU import ban in 2015, and so have local Mexican plants where horses are cruelly slaughtered with the puntilla knife method. The internal market has not been affected by the EU import ban.”

A public petition calling on the EU Commission to stop horse meat imports from overseas has collected more than 213,000 signatures so far. All Belgian supermarkets have ceased selling horse meat from South America. However, some supermarkets in France still sell horse meat imported from this region.FEBEV argues the video’s content is misleading but AWF/TSB says it does not claim anything it cannot prove.

Transparency concerns

AWF/TSB’s film appears to capture scenes of cruelty — including workers beating horses with sticks and brooms, and injured and emaciated horses left unattended and driven limping from the transporters into pens — at slaughterhouses participating in the European importers’ Respectful Life project.

Respectful Life, launched in 2016, is a joint initiative between FEBEV and the Catholic University of Leuven (KU Leuven), intended to improve animal welfare in the horse meat sector through scientific research.

The NGOs also highlight that several EU audits and investigations by animal welfare organizations show that the traceability of horses is not guaranteed, threatening food safety.

Moreover, Gurtner says it is unrealistic that the traceability issue can be overcome in the near future. “Argentina would have to introduce mandatory microchipping for all horses (not just those going to slaughter) and register them in a national database — this would be expensive and take a lot of time,” she explains.

FEBEV points to initiatives introduced by Respectful Life to assess animal welfare in countries such as Argentina and Uruguay. These measures include observation missions by researchers from KU Leuven and Universiteit Gent in Belgium, where, according to Gore, “independent professors assess the situation critically while advising companies and their staff on areas for improvement.” They also include “random monitoring of companies in third countries by an independent Belgian researcher who has access to the companies’ cameras.”

“Thanks to these initiatives, we are seeing a real change in working conditions, particularly in South America, and a definite improvement in the welfare of the horses. This improvement was observed by the EC’s auditors in their last audit report (November 2022) on Argentinian horse meat,” he says.

However, Gurtner suggests that this audit report is actually very critical about the standards of traceability and animal welfare. “The report criticizes the transport of heavily pregnant mares, the insufficient shelter and moldy feed at slaughterhouses, as well as general animal welfare conditions at assembly centers (lack of shade or protection against inclement weather, bad floor conditions, insufficient feed/water supply),” she says.

“Regarding the camera monitoring, it is important to note that not all areas of the slaughterhouses are monitored (for example, slaughterhouse pastures are missing), and all the previous stages, like transport and assembly centers, are not under camera monitoring either. Also, visits are announced in advance.”Animal protection groups reject FEBEV’s argument that banning Argentinian imports would actually worsen horse welfare standards.

Money matters

Gore concludes by adding that Respectful Life “deplores the fact that, despite generous annual donations received by these animal welfare organizations, nothing has been done on their side to improve the welfare of horses in these countries.”

Gurtner responds: “It is not correct that we NGOs do nothing to improve the welfare of horses in the countries concerned. Firstly, we collaborate with local NGOs that are dedicated specifically to horse welfare.”

“Secondly, the reduced demand from Switzerland and the EU has led to significant changes for the horses. For example, in Mexico, two out of previously four slaughterhouses no longer slaughter horses today. Also, the number of US horses enduring long-distance transport to Mexico and Canada has considerably reduced and horse slaughter in Canada has dropped significantly in the past years.”

AWF/TSB claims that FEBEV and Skin Packing are attempting to “silence unpopular opponents with legal proceedings” through a strategy known as SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation).

“This [strategy] means that financially strong companies drag non-profit organizations such as AWF and TSB through costly legal proceedings,” says Gurtner.

Skin Packing declined to comment at the time of publication.