{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018005540166204988, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008310249307479225, 'mean_word_length': 5.232758620689655, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What was Left Unsaid: The Unconstitutionality of the Performing Animals Protection Act in Nspca V Minister of Agriculture, Forestry And Fisheries

It is rare for cases concerning animal welfare legislation to reach the Constitutional Court. The case of NSPCA v Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries is therefore notable in that the constitutionality of sections of the Performing Animals Protection Act 24 of 1935 (PAPA) was placed under scrutiny. Even more importantly, two sections of the Act, which could be regarded as its heart and soul were declared unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court has effectively now placed the government on terms to require a revision of, at least, this piece of legislation.