Imagine being forced not to visit the small room to answer nature’s call! Or being prevented from eating. Or even talking? Some individuals would call it an infringement on their fundamental human rights. Yes, human rights, you may call it; that is why human beings are an essential part of society, right? 

But what happens when the infringement is on the animal? Did I hear you call it fundamental animal rights? Hum! Whatever name you may call it, the question is: should we apply rights randomly? Another topic for the Human-Animal Studies (HAST).

It was not an April Fool’s joke, but you may believe so if you wish; another part of your rights. 

A court in Kano, Nigeria, has ordered the owner of a noisy cock until Friday to slaughter it after neighbours complained of noise pollution, according to local media.

The court in the country’s northern city declared the rooster a noise pollutant and nuisance to the neighbourhood for its frequent crowing after two neighbours went to court and complained that the cockerel prevented them from sleeping. 

According to Premium Times news website reports, one of the neighbours, Yusuf Muhammed, insisted in the court that the rooster’s crowing infringed his right to a restful sleep.

Reacting to the allegation, the owner of the cock Isyaku Shu’aibu told the court that he had bought the rooster for the Good Friday feast and begged the magistrate to allow him until the Christian holy day before killing the bird for the festive celebration. 

The presiding magistrate Halima Wali granted the defendant’s request and warned him to keep the bird in custody to prevent it from roaming around and disturbing residents with its relentless crowing. 

It is hard to say whether keeping the crowing cockerel in custody is enough to prevent it from obeying nature’s crowning call. I bet the owner Isyaku Shu’aibu has a difficult task ahead – forcing the bird not to crow or sending it to school to learn how best to cohabit with other species - in an increasingly intolerant and egocentric society.