- The Guardian,
- Saturday January 27 2001
But pro-hunt campaigners claimed the high court judgment was at most a partial victory for the RSPCA as Mr Justice Lightman stopped the charity from arbitrarily excluding anyone it believed had suspicious motives for joining.
Instead the animal welfare group will have to give all applicants a chance to explain their primary motives for becoming members.
The RSPCA took the unusual step of seeking guidance from the high court to clarify its membership rules after officials suspected the charity had fallen victim to "entryism" by the pro-hunting Countryside Animal Welfare Group, led by the Olympic equestrian medallist Richard Meade.
Last year the charity put on hold 600 applications for membership, which it believed were part of a campaign to overturn its opposition to hunting with dogs, a keystone policy of the RSPCA since 1976.
Mr Meade, who denies the allegation of entryism, claims the CAWG was formed by those in rural areas who believed the RSPCA had "lost its way".
The group was represented at the hearing, together with two applicants whose membership had not been confirmed, to oppose the RSPCA move.
The society told the judge that any infiltration campaign to change the official policy and promote field sports was damaging.
Mr Justice Lightman said the society did have the right to exclude or remove members under its rules but to do so meant every case would have to go before the full 25-strong council, which cannot delegate its powers.
The RSPCA had asked the judge to approve a scheme to exclude anyone who fell within categories it thought indicated they were joining to promote hunting with dogs - without giving them a chance to deny this.
But the judge said: "After long and anxious consideration, I have concluded that it is not in the interests of the society or conducive to its good name to adopt such an arbitrary and unattractive method of implementing the membership policy."
He said applicants must be given the chance to explain their motives "to meet the real risk of injustice arising from wrong categorisation".
Malcolm Phipps, chairman of the RSPCA's ruling council, said he welcomed the ruling. "The RSPCA is a democratic organisation, but clearly concerted efforts to join the society for any overriding reason other than animal welfare makes a mockery of this democracy. Today's ruling has given the society a mechanism to protect itself against infiltration and ensures that the society's vital work is not hindered."
A friend of Mr Meade, who has been a member of the RSPCA since 1970, said he would not be commenting until he had digested the contents of the ruling.
The case, which was heard in November, was initially delayed after two judges scheduled to hear the case disclosed their involvement with hunting. One admitted he was a member of the Countryside Alliance while the other admitted he allowed hare coursing on his Norfolk land.
