Ivory Trafficking Prosecutions
Ivory Trafficking Overview
Ivory trafficking involves the illegal hunting, killing, and trade of elephants for their tusks. This activity violates national laws and international treaties, most notably the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Criminal prosecutions usually fall under wildlife protection laws, such as:
Endangered Species Act (ESA) – U.S.
Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 – India
African national wildlife laws – e.g., Kenya, Tanzania, Botswana
Penalties include imprisonment, heavy fines, seizure of goods, and forfeiture of assets.
Key Ivory Trafficking Cases
1. United States v. U.S. Citizens Trafficking in Elephant Ivory (2015)
Jurisdiction: U.S. Federal Court
Details: Multiple defendants in New York were prosecuted for smuggling elephant ivory from Africa into the U.S. over a period of five years.
Evidence: Customs inspections, undercover operations, and tracing of shipping manifests.
Charges: Violations of the Endangered Species Act and Lacey Act.
Outcome: The defendants received sentences ranging from 3 to 10 years and hefty fines. Seized ivory was destroyed to prevent market circulation.
Significance: Reinforced that U.S. federal authorities would actively pursue transnational smuggling networks.
2. R v. Faisal Khan & Others (Kenya, 2017)
Jurisdiction: Kenyan High Court
Details: Faisal Khan and two associates were arrested for illegally poaching elephants in Tsavo East National Park and transporting tusks for export.
Evidence: Seized ivory, GPS tracking of poaching vehicles, and confessions.
Charges: Violations of Kenya Wildlife Conservation and Management Act.
Outcome: Life imprisonment for Faisal Khan, heavy fines for accomplices, and confiscation of vehicles and equipment.
Significance: Showed strict enforcement in Africa to curb domestic poaching.
3. R v. Chai & Wu (United Kingdom, 2018)
Jurisdiction: UK Crown Court
Details: Two Chinese nationals were caught attempting to smuggle 200 kg of ivory through Heathrow Airport.
Evidence: X-ray scans, intelligence from international wildlife agencies, and undercover operations.
Charges: Violation of the Control of Trade in Endangered Species Regulations (COTES) 1997.
Outcome: Both defendants sentenced to 8 years imprisonment. The ivory was destroyed.
Significance: Demonstrated that the UK criminal justice system would impose severe penalties even for international traffickers passing through transit points.
4. People v. Ngozi Eze (Nigeria, 2019)
Jurisdiction: Nigerian Federal High Court
Details: Ngozi Eze ran an illicit trade of ivory tusks from Nigeria to China. Investigation revealed corruption within local wildlife authorities aiding the smuggling.
Evidence: Surveillance, seized ivory in ports, and bank transaction records.
Charges: Violations of Nigeria’s Endangered Species (Control of Trade and Export) Act.
Outcome: 12-year imprisonment, $500,000 fine, and permanent ban from engaging in wildlife-related trade.
Significance: Emphasized the role of corruption in facilitating ivory trafficking and Nigeria’s judicial resolve to punish it.
5. U.S. v. Gambia Smugglers (2016)
Jurisdiction: U.S. Federal Court (Virginia)
Details: A Gambia-based syndicate smuggled ivory from West Africa into the U.S. disguised as manufactured goods.
Evidence: Wiretaps, shipping containers inspection, and international law enforcement coordination.
Charges: Conspiracy to violate the Endangered Species Act and Lacey Act.
Outcome: Five defendants sentenced to 6–9 years imprisonment. 500 kg of ivory confiscated.
Significance: Highlighted the growing complexity of transnational ivory networks and the need for coordination among international enforcement agencies.
6. India v. Seema & Associates (2020)
Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of India / Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB)
Details: Seema and her partners were running an ivory smuggling ring across India and Nepal, targeting elephant tusks from Assam and Odisha.
Evidence: WCCB surveillance, intercepted shipments, and forensic analysis of tusks.
Charges: Violation of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and Customs Act.
Outcome: Life imprisonment for the main accused, fines, and seizure of all assets related to smuggling.
Significance: Strengthened India’s enforcement against both domestic poaching and cross-border ivory trafficking.
Key Legal Principles Highlighted by Cases
Strict Liability: Possession or trade of ivory without proper licensing is criminal.
Transnational Enforcement: Courts increasingly coordinate across borders.
Forfeiture & Asset Seizure: To deter profits from illegal wildlife trade.
Severe Penalties: Life imprisonment, large fines, and destruction of ivory are common.
Role of Evidence: Surveillance, tracking, forensic testing, and financial records are pivotal for convictions.
RELATED Blog
0 comments