Origins of the revision of 86/609

In late 2001, the European Commission made a proposal that a regulatory committee procedure should be created to facilitate the amendment of the annexes to Directive 86/609. In the same proposal they acknowledged that there should also be a full revision of Directive 86/609.

The following reasons have been cited for the revision:

Scientific changes since 1986 meant that some of the provisions were now out of date.
The need to align Directive 86/609 with the equivalent Council of Europe Convention ETS123.
To promote improvements in the welfare of laboratory animals.
That a number of the provisions of Directive 86/609 are open to interpretation.

The European Parliament moved swiftly, announcing only a few weeks later that their Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy would be producing an ‘own initiative’ report on Directive 86/609. Own initiative reports are statements of the Parliament’s views and have no formal role in the legislative process, but they are often used as a way of influencing the agenda for upcoming legislation.

The own initiative report, often called the ‘Jill Evans report’ after its Rapporteur, was adopted by the Parliament on December 2002. It took a somewhat negative view of animal experimentation and was critical of Directive 86/609. It made a number of specific proposals, including:

The use on non-human primates in experiments should be reviewed
The directive should cover foetal and embryonic forms of animals as well as cephalopods and decapods
A central database of animal experiments to prevent duplication
Stricter licensing procedures based on a cost-benefit analysis
A central EU inspectorate for animal experimentation

In early 2002, the European Commission requested their Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare to produce a report on the welfare of non-human primates used in experiments. The report was published in December 2002.