Law SchoolNorthumbria University57531021082000A Critical Analysis and Suggested Reform of Sentencing and Disqualification Orders under the Animal Welfare Act 2006Word Count: 16,414This Project is Submitted for the Qualification of MLawDate of Submission: 26th May 2020Name: Daniel HailsSupervisor Name:Dr Rachel DunnResearch DeclarationI confirm that I have already submitted my Project Synopsis and Ethical Approval Form, which has been signed by my supervisor. I further confirm that this project is entirely my own work and that research undertaken for the completion of this project was based entirely on secondary material or data already in the public domain (case law, journal articles, published surveys etc.) It did not involve people in data collection through empirical research (e.g. interviews, questionnaires, or observation).6210306946600Signed: Dated: 26th May 2020Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Acknowledgements PAGEREF _Toc41413402 \h 4Introduction PAGEREF _Toc41413403 \h 5Chapter 1: The Philosophy Behind Animal Welfare PAGEREF _Toc41413404 \h 7Introduction PAGEREF _Toc41413405 \h 7The History of Animal Welfare PAGEREF _Toc41413406 \h 7Why Animal Suffering Matters PAGEREF _Toc41413407 \h 10Common Theories and Why They are Failing PAGEREF _Toc41413408 \h 13New Directions: Citizenship PAGEREF _Toc41413409 \h 16Citizenship and Legal Protection PAGEREF _Toc41413410 \h 19Chapter 2: UK Law on Animal Cruelty and the Need for Change PAGEREF _Toc41413411 \h 20Introduction PAGEREF _Toc41413412 \h 20Outline of the UK Law PAGEREF _Toc41413413 \h 20Critique of the UK Law PAGEREF _Toc41413414 \h 23Disqualification Orders PAGEREF _Toc41413415 \h 23Imprisonment PAGEREF _Toc41413416 \h 27Public Interest and the Need for Change PAGEREF _Toc41413417 \h 32Animal Cruelty and Interpersonal Violence PAGEREF _Toc41413418 \h 33The Link Between Animal Abuse and Domestic Violence PAGEREF _Toc41413419 \h 34The Link Between Animal Abuse and Child Abuse PAGEREF _Toc41413420 \h 35Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc41413421 \h 35Chapter 3: Comparison to International Legal Systems and Proposed Changes PAGEREF _Toc41413422 \h 36Introduction PAGEREF _Toc41413423 \h 36Comparison to International Legal Systems PAGEREF _Toc41413424 \h 36Sentencing PAGEREF _Toc41413425 \h 37Further Protections PAGEREF _Toc41413426 \h 44Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc41413427 \h 49Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc41413428 \h 50Bibliography PAGEREF _Toc41413429 \h 53Primary Sources PAGEREF _Toc41413430 \h 53Secondary Sources PAGEREF _Toc41413431 \h 54AcknowledgementsFirstly, I would like to thank Debbie Rook for introducing me to the area of animal law in my second year of study at Northumbria University. The knowledge I gained within that module inspired me to delve further into the aspects discussed within this dissertation. Secondly, an enormous thank you to my supervisor, Dr Rachel Dunn, for her guidance and support throughout the writing of this dissertation. Her kindness, approachability, and overall willingness to help has been invaluable in completing this work.Finally, a special thank you to all my family and friends, in particular my parents, who have not just supported me through my university studies but through all aspects of life. Without them I would not be the person I am today. IntroductionMuch like the evolution of man, the relationship that humans hold with animals has also evolved over time. However, as this relationship constantly develops, it is crucial that the importance of animal welfare does not fade into the background. Humans rely on animals on a daily basis, regardless of whether this relationship is for commercial purposes or companionship, an animal’s welfare should always be preserved. As with all aspects of society, protection resides within the law, however, within the UK, such protection requires improvement. This need for improvement is evident due to the UK’s recent demotion from Category A to Category B in the Animal Protection Index, an index that is collated to assess the protection of animals on a global scale. The purpose of this dissertation is to evaluate the current protections animals have within the legal system, giving specific reference to the enforcement of sentencing powers available to courts for animal related offences. To fully assess this lack of protection and the need for change, three main areas will be considered. Firstly, in Chapter 1 the philosophy behind animal rights and their welfare will be discussed, giving specific reference to the Citizenship theory. This will initiate thought around this area and allow for clarity on why animals are deserving of further protection within the law. Secondly, an outline and analysis of the current law and sanctions available within the UK will be provided. This critique will not just be limited to that of custodial sentencing, but also the lack of enforceability surrounding other sentencing measures such as disqualification. Furthermore, there will be focus on how it is in the public interest to increase animal protection. This discussion will draw reference to numerous points such as the correlation between animal and human violence and how these offences intertwine within the legal system. This, coupled with the philosophy discussion, will offer not just why animals are deserving of protection but how such protection may also benefit humans. Finally, after establishing a need for change, an assessment of animal welfare measures within international legal systems will be provided. This will allow for suggestions to be made as to how the UK system could be reformed and improved to tackle the issues discussed. Comparisons of the UK measures will be made to both European, Australian and United States’ legal systems. The propositions put forward will range from a simple increase in sentencing, to further measures such as the introduction of an animal abuse register and upward departures for animal related crimes. Chapter 1: The Philosophy Behind Animal WelfareIntroductionPhilosophy and the theories behind it play a crucial part in critiquing and influencing various aspects of human society. Although the discussions within this area may not have a direct link to legal innovation, inferences from these discussions put forward some interesting thoughts to consider. Whether these theories can be used to improve the whole of the English legal system, or just specific areas, is yet to be established. However, for the purposes of this chapter, and the text as a whole, only theories regarding animal welfare will be discussed.In order to understand the need for reform within the legal system, readers must understand the nature behind animals and their sentience on this planet. Therefore, a brief introduction to the history of animal welfare will be provided together with how the current theories have been furthered in recent years, to evoke a change in society’s outlook. This chronological development will serve as a backbone of thought to allow readers to fully consider the proposed changes presented.The History of Animal WelfareThe discussion surrounding animal welfare and their entitlement to a life without suffering is not a new debate, however, it is a debate that has not been furthered substantially in the past two centuries, with evidence of such laboured progression being displayed in England’s legal and political history.Debates surrounding this area were first sparked in 1800 by political and legal pioneers such as William Pulteney, who introduced the first Bill proposing the protection of animals, specifically bulls. The Bill was brought on 2nd April 1800 to prevent a sport known as bullbaiting, in which specially bred dogs would be set upon bulls for human entertainment. The Bill failed by a close margin of 43 votes to 41. A close margin that comes with heightened frustration when compared with other Bills passed by parliament in the same year, such as a Bill that was designed to regulate the price of bread. Although Mr Pulteney’s actions did not result in the Bill being passed, his actions sparked inspiration for future politicians to further the argument to newfound levels. Politicians such as Lord Thomas Erskine, who was the first member of Parliament to suggest the idea that animals should be deserving of not just protection, but rights, in 1809. This suggestion, however, alongside Mr Pulteney’s Bill, was quite quickly rejected in the House of Commons after passing a second reading in the House of Lords. It was not until 7th June 1822 that the first legislation surrounding the protection of animals was finally passed. This legislation was known as Martin’s Act, in honour of the MP of Galway who promoted the Bill, Richard Martin. With the introduction of this Act, for the first time in English legal history, it was an offence to “beat, abuse, or ill-treat any horse, mare, gelding, mule, ass, ox, cow, heifer, steer, sheep or other cattle”. A breach of such an offence was punishable by both a fine and imprisonment. Although this legislation explicitly refers to which animals are worthy of protection, mainly those which were victim of publicly-displayed cruelty at that time, the introduction of this Act led to even further development surrounding animal welfare in England and Wales.Two years after the introduction of Martin’s Act, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) was established in 1824, the first society of its kind in Britain. Although the introduction of such a society can be seen as a landmark in the history of animal welfare, the Society’s outlooks were very much based on the provisions set out in the Martin’s Act. Therefore, similar to the law at the time, protection was not afforded to animals of all sorts. The early years of the SPCA were spent preventing public displays of animal cruelty, such as the abuse of carriage horses, rather than pushing for the protection to be expanded to private dwellings and the animals residing in these i.e. domesticated pets. The SPCA was then reformed in 1840, providing us with what is now the most established society for animal welfare in Britain, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA). However, even with the introduction of this newly-branded society, the scope of animals that were worthy of protection remained the same. The RSPCA, for years to come, enforced a strange form of ‘see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil’ in an attempt to prevent humans from witnessing acts of animal abuse in public, rather than preventing the abuse of animals altogether. It wasn’t until the early 1900s that this focus was changed and the RSPCA moved away from protection of only farm animals, to focus on the protection of both domesticated and wild animals. However, this movement was more of a mirroring of the previous movement, as although wild and domesticated animals were now at the forefront of their work, the protection of farm animals had taken a retrograde step, damaging the public awareness of such issues and their importance.This has thankfully come to an end in the past few decades with the RSPCA’s activities, once again, returning to the farming industry, with this prevalence, possibly, being instigated by the rise of intensive farming practices that occurred post World War II in an attempt to spike food production around the UK.Importantly, they have also expanded their focus on other issues such as the use of animals in lab testing and experiments, hunting, the use of animals in circuses and the treatment of animals in zoos. It is encouraging to note that the RSPCA has managed to incorporate all these additional areas without causing detriment to the protection they have continued to provide for domesticated and wild animals, therefore, proving themselves as the most essential society in the history of animal welfare and its development within England over the past two centuries.The essential work that the RSPCA undertake in their fight against animal cruelty is aided by current legislative measures in place within the UK. Although previous discussion has outlined the history of legal innovation, the statutes and Bills mentioned prior are not currently circulating today. Instead, the RSPCA base the majority of their prosecutions on offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and rely on the robustness of this Act to ensure the correct sanctions are placed on those individuals who breach these provisions. These sanctions, as will be discussed in subsequent chapters, are, unfortunately, not as robust as they could be and are, therefore, leaving vulnerable animals in danger of abuse.Nevertheless, it is clear that the basic relationship that humans hold with animals is partially lacking. Whether this be the use of animals in agriculture or the testing on animals for medical advances, animals are continually being abused for the ‘benefit’ of human gain. This abusive relationship has been described by some theorists as an “external Treblinka” and unfortunately, a relationship that is showing no signs of changing.Why Animal Suffering MattersFirstly, it is important to clarify what is meant by the term suffering. This term has many definitions that may be relevant, however, the most common of these is the association of physical pain with suffering. As much as physical pain can go hand in hand with suffering, it must be made clear that suffering can exist in many different forms, not just that of a physical nature. The suffering an animal may endure as a result of stimuli could amount to mental suffering such as anxiety, stress and terror, rather than the physical feeling of pain. Therefore, suffering can broadly be defined as “harm that an animal experiences characterised as a deficiency in (or negative aspect of) that animal’s well-being.” In modern society it is generally believed that most humans would refrain from imposing or witnessing such suffering on another human, whether the suffering was of a mental or physical nature. However, being in a position to extend the prevention of suffering to animals will only be possible once humans are educated on the similarities they have, especially in infancy, with their animal counterparts. It is unfortunate that animal suffering, especially in Western society, is generally accepted as a result of human arrogance or selfishness. This acceptance is demonstrated daily throughout the global farming industry. Here, animals are viewed as part of the production line, another essential cog in the process of providing humans with food. Simply viewing animals as ‘things’ rather than living beings, as coined by Gary Francione, is known a ‘moral schizophrenia’. An ideal that has been enshrined in human nature, dating as far back as the seventeenth century where René Descartes “likened animals to “automatons, or moving machines”. As mentioned though, the sad truth is, this archaic view is still prominent today, with much of this ‘moral schizophrenia’, similar to the one outlined above, being justified by fallacious arguments and justifications. Whether it be the proposition that we “need” meat to survive in response to the suggestion of a plant-based diet, or the argument that animals simply aren’t as “aware” as humans are to their surroundings. For the purpose of this dissertation, it is the latter of these propositions which needs clarified in order to reinforce the argument that animal suffering really does matter. The awareness animals have of their surroundings, from a philosophical perspective anyway, relates more to an animal’s ability to feel, rather than their instinctive ability to hunt prey or detect predators. This is why it is more commonly put forward that animals lack the ‘sentience’ that humans do. Despite this label, even in the field, this definition of ‘sentience’ is contested and therefore carries with it some ambiguity. Some dictionaries define it as “sense perception”, however, the majority of philosophers and animal advocates use the term to “denote the capacity for suffering… pain and pleasure”. Therefore, in other words, the quality of being able to experience feelings. It is true that humans are social animals and therefore experience feelings and concepts that other animals may never even consider within their lifetime, such as “the angst relating to whether life is worth living or the concept of death at all”. However, importantly, these feelings are only prevalent in adult humans and are developed later in life. Therefore, starving a being of the protection against suffering, purely because they cannot experience these feelings seems somewhat perverse. It may not just be animals that cannot experience these feelings of sentience; surely infant humans and individuals with specific disabilities lack this function also. Yet it would be inconceivable to accept such suffering to these groups. This distinction is known, and discussed further below, as the “argument from marginal cases” and is a well-renowned contradiction to the “sentience” theory above.Andrew Linzey, a leader in the animal rights movement, put forward a test case relating to this very point. He imagined a scenario in which you were staying at your old friends’ house; an older, wiser philosopher than yourself. Throughout the night you were woken by the sounds of screaming and consequently went to investigate the origin of this noise. Upon investigation you found your friend beating his young infant child, of no more than one year old. Instead of forcibly protesting against the matter, you instead spark a debate with your friend, as he is a philosopher himself. You ask for the reasoning behind such action and demonstrate your objection to such a breach of morality. However, your friend justifies his actions as him having more superior interests than his infant son and how his son lacks the intelligence and awareness to experience the amount of suffering that an adult can including a lack of angst surrounding the concept of death. Your friend goes on to state further that with the absence of language, there is no way of determining whether the groans and cries heard are in fact from suffering or just a “gurgling of his stomach”. Furthermore, and to finalise, your friend states that a living being without an adult level of human intelligence and responsibility cannot have moral rights, and therefore, his actions are just. Although this scenario is perhaps quite extreme, it is once again clear that any normal human would object to such treatment of another human, especially an infant. However, on further inspection, the similarities of such a case and the way humans treat animals is uncanny. Yes, it is true that animals lack the capability to communicate with our created languages and they obviously have nowhere near as much social responsibility as we do as adults. However, they are not absent of these factors altogether. They too have ways in which they communicate, and responsibilities of their own, similar to the way in which infant humans do. It is arguable, in fact, that animals bear greater responsibilities than that of a human infant, but this lack of responsibility on the side of the infant does not void its entitlement to rights. It is, therefore, remarkably clear why animal suffering matters. Animal suffering matters, just as infant and vulnerable humans’ suffering matters, and drawing a distinction between the two is flawed. All are living creatures inhabiting the same environment, each striving for the same goal, survival. Common Theories and Why They are FailingRegardless of the abusive relationship that humans hold with animals, theorists are constantly striving to change society’s outlook on animals for the better, in their quest for a fairer world for animals. It is safe to say that these theories, that have been created, innovated, and expanded throughout the centuries, have made greater advances than the changes observed in England’s legal or political systems. However, a theory is worth nothing without proper implementation. A theory is properly executed when it evokes a change in society’s outlook on a wider scale than what is being observed in modern times. There are many theories currently in circulation, but this chapter will concentrate on the most common in use and offer analyses of why these theories are failing, shedding light on the changes required, to fully expand the protection of animals to a new level. The majority of humans will not relate their views to a particular ‘theory’ but would more commonly refer to their views as ‘morals’, or in this case ‘moral frameworks’. As one could imagine, there are endless possibilities when trying to compile various individuals’ morals into one generic formula. However, it is safe, for the purposes of animal welfare debates, to assume there are three ‘basic moral frameworks’ that are observed in modern society, with each of these frameworks potentially bearing similarities to wider used philosophical theories.The first of these frameworks is a concept referred to as the ‘welfarist’ approach. This is the framework that is most widely observed or associated with most members of society. This framework acknowledges that the majority of humans accept that animal welfare matters, but it does not rank highly on their agenda. Therefore, they believe that, from a moral perspective, human beings stand above animals in the hierarchy. This belief, in philosophy, is known as speciesism – a “prejudice or attitude of bias in favour of the interest of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species”.The second of the proposed frameworks is known as the ‘ecological’ approach. This approach, in general, provides more protection to animals than would be observed under a ‘welfarist’ approach. The ‘ecological’ approach focuses on the health of ecosystems as a whole, rather than the protection of individual animals or species themselves. It does, therefore, protect animals from a wide range of human practices that have a negative impact on both animals and their ecosystems. Such protections range from the prevention of habitat destruction to limiting the polluting and carbon-generating effects of, for example, factory farming. Besides this broader application, the approach does not serve as blanket protection for animals as a whole. This is due to situations that may occur that would involve the killing of animals to preserve the health of the ecosystem as a whole, such as: sustainable hunting, livestock farming or the culling of invasive or overpopulated species.The final of the proposed frameworks is known as the ‘basic rights’ approach or animal rights theory (ART). This is the approach that the majority of animal welfare advocates and societies adopt in the fight for improving the standards humans impose on animals. The theory revolves around the idea that animals, like humans, should be seen as possessing certain rights under law. Rights that are referred to as inviolable, in the sense that they should never be broken, infringed or dishonoured. These rights could be observed as an extension of the statutory human rights enshrined in law, with such an extension contributing to the overall concept of moral equality. It is the ART’s intentions that animals will one day benefit from the inviolable rights available to humans. These rights include, but are not exhaustive to, the right to life, “the right not to be tortured, imprisoned, subjected to medical experimentation, forcibly separated from their families or culled”. It is the concept that these rights should be mutually exclusive for both animals and humans and not just limited to the protection of humans under statute. It is this theory that has been relied upon by animal welfare societies and advocates for decades, however, no real change has been observed in relation to animals’ protection. This being said, there are some potential reasons for this failure.One of the reasons for ART failing is as a result of individuals holding a different perspective to how animals should be treated. For example, an individual who is party to the major moral approach outlined above (the ‘welfarist’ approach) is unlikely to agree with the suggestions put forward by a supporter of ART. But why is it seemingly the case that the majority of society are a supporter of this ‘welfarist’ approach and not ART? The answer to this question once again falls to the philosophy of speciesism and the development of this philosophy in Western culture. Western culture has, for centuries, operated on the premise that animals are lower than humans on some ‘cosmic moral hierarchy’. It is this operation that has been engrained into humans from the lowest of ages, even if such manipulation is done so unconsciously. This hierarchy is especially prevalent within the agricultural industry; however, such hierarchy could be extended to the domestication of household pets or the dominion over wild animals also. Relating specifically to the agricultural industry, this manipulation relates to the tainted picture presented to children from an early age surrounding the welfare and treatment of animals in agriculture. Whether this be the stuffed animals they are given as gifts in the appearance of bears or lions rather than that of pigs or cows, or the books they are read before bed by their parents. Books such as ‘Farm Animals’ which presents a child with the construed image that farm animals are happily surrounded by their young without a cage, shed or stall in sight and that all pigs have to do is “enjoy a good meal, then roll in the mud and let out a good squeal”. Further to this, other books which portray a similar message show agricultural animals benefiting from “rural simplicity” and that animals run freely with their young in orchards and fields. It is no surprise, therefore, that with this image children develop the concept of speciesism in later life. That they develop the belief that animals “must” die to provide for humans, as they have lived a happy and suffering-free life up until that exact point. An ideal that consequently extends to the dominance over all animals, regardless of their species or origin.It is important to note that society is not purely reliant on a ‘welfarist’ approach due to speciesism, but their direction may be reinforced by the failings observed with ART itself. The societies and individuals that enforce ART mainly focus on negative rights such as the right not to be owned, confined, tortured, or separated from one’s family, rather than the duties owed to animals. Although these are rights that animals should benefit from, providing society with relational duties they must adhere to, would allow for the development of respect between humans and animals. These relational duties would relate to a human’s obligation to respects animals’ habitats, their obligation to rescue animals who are unintentionally harmed by human activities or their obligation to care for the animals who, either by domestication or another way, have become dependent on them. The enforcement of these relational duties and the development of respect thereof will in turn aid the protection of animals against the negative rights mentioned above. Without a change of direction on the enforcement of these duties, or a change of the theory altogether, society will remain trapped in their current ways, with no further developments occurring as a result of this. However, it appears that one theory regarding this matter is being developed. A theory with the potential for a real change in society’s outlook, this theory is the theory of ‘citizenship’.New Directions: CitizenshipThe theory of citizenship has been developed in acknowledgement of the potentially defective theories available currently, with the intention of providing a new moral framework. This framework works on connecting the treatment of animals to the fundamental principles of democratic justice and human rights. The theory not only draws reference to these principles, but it does so by acknowledging the complicated relationship humans hold with their animal counterparts. Co-existence is required to further the development of animal protection worldwide and this theory could act as an underlying framework for this development.The theory, quite obviously, focusses on the idea that animals should be issued with citizenship of some sort, depending on their status in society. The application of this theory to animals is logical because it is the same system that is afforded to humans from various countries around the world. Humans are residents to their own distinct societies and countries, to which they are deemed citizens of. Then you have co-citizens and visitors to specific countries who are afforded these titles as a result of their residence. It is the current stance, in human society, that citizens of a country are afforded more rights in general than that of co-citizens or visitors to that specific country. However, all parties benefit from fundamental rights that cannot be breached, regardless of title or status. Citizenship theory suggests that this malleable approach to rights should not only be imposed on humans, but animals also.Applying this theory, animals which would be afforded full citizenship, similar to those humans who are nationals to their country, would be animals that have been domesticated by or for the use of humans. This would be the most just and moral option because their domestication is a product of selective breeding over generations by humans, similar to the human creation of borders and nations centuries ago. With these animals being essentially forced into their living by humans as their ‘masters’, they should be provided with the relevant protection in light of this. The protection of those we bring into the world is an ongoing responsibility and is one that cannot be derogated from if and when we please. Parents, who bring their child into the world, do so for life. This innate social responsibility should be extended to the animals we bring into our lives also, as they are dependent on our care and nurture on the same level as an infant. Parental neglection of a child would be frowned upon in society and so should that of an animal companion.Moving on from the idea of full citizenship, there are a minority of individuals who reside in their chosen country and are subject to that country’s governance, but who are not afforded citizenship. This would relate to what is known as ‘denizens’, which is normally the term used to refer to migrant workers or refugees of a country. Similar to the human equivalent, animals that bear the same characteristics of these minorities should be afforded a similar level of rights. These rights would be protected under the fundamental rights but would not include the granting of all the rights observed by full citizens, such as the right to vote. Animals in this category would relate to opportunistic animals such as foxes, rats and pigeons (or any other scavenging animal relevant). Finally, under the theory, a third level of rights would be afforded to animals which, from a human analogy, reside in different countries or colonies. This is particularly relevant to wild animals who reside in their own territory but are still vulnerable to human invasion and colonisation such as deer, badgers, and wild rabbits.With the other theories available for the fight against animal cruelty, such as the ‘welfarist’ approach and the ART theory falling short of the protection required, the Citizenship theory provides a new, more formatted structure. After all, although it may sound extreme, the ideas behind Citizenship theory have proved essential in combatting the worst forms of austerity humankind has ever seen. Although racism and the horrors that run alongside it are not totally eradicated in modern society, the granting of citizenship has aided the fight against racism around the world. In the United States Constitution, the 14th Amendment allows for “all persons born or naturalized in the United States… [to be] citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”. This ratification of this amendment in 1868 allowed for African-Americans to be “emancipated from slavery, [representing] a turning point in the country’s history”. Therefore, the granting of citizenship provided rights to these individuals, such as the 15th Amendment’s right to vote. This application of what is essentially the backbone of the Citizenship theory shows how change can be successfully achieved. This is not just down to the success imposing citizenship has had in the past, but the familiarity humans have with imposing such measures. Of course, it may seem abnormal to provide animals with rights now, however, it is abnormality that inspires change and change is what is needed.However, even with this need for change, the Citizenship theory is not free of criticism. Firstly, it is suggested issues lie within the structure of the theory itself. It has been argued by academics that the categorisation of different animals and what rights they hold as a result of this could “deny outsiders their just entitlements, and [could] unfairly privilege the rights of insiders.” With the current structure of the theory, domesticated animals would be deemed as ‘citizens’, therefore, affording them more rights than that of opportunistic animals or ‘denizens’. Therefore, although the theory may work in practice by improving the overall welfare of the animals we commonly interact with, it may struggle to provide blanket protection to all animals of all categories. It is this potential limit on protection that has been raised as challenge to the theory.Secondly, a further challenge relates to the political nature of the theory, more specifically the ability of an animal to democratically vote. These arguments, however, are fuelled by a misunderstanding of the term citizenship. Individuals must be made aware that citizenship relates to the allocation of “individuals to territories [and] to allocate membership in sovereign peoples” (as discussed above). It is not determined by a beings ability to politically vote, as, once again, infants are deemed as citizens but lack the capability to democratically vote. Therefore, restricting the definition of citizenship to this ability alone would exclude “large numbers of humans from citizenship rights” also. However, with this criticism in mind, it shows clarification is needed to the role in which imposing Citizenship theory on animals will have on their legal protection.Citizenship and Legal ProtectionFor the purpose of this theory and its implication, it must be stressed, once again, that activists are not lobbying for animals to have rights that are fully equal to that of humans, such as a dog being given the right to vote or freedom of speech, as these rights would not be cohesive with the animals’ characteristics. They are simply striving for transferable rights to be imposed on animals of all sorts, with these rights being variant of their specific title or residence in society. The introduction of this style system would innovate the legal protection afforded to animals. Legal protection, similar to that of the Human Rights Act 1998, that would allow for fundamental rights to be imposed on animals. In application of this protection, domesticated animals would be afforded more rights, as citizens, than that of foxes and pigeons, as denizens. The balance of these rights, based on an animal’s status would have to be clarified, however, the introduction of strict statutory inviolable rights will automatically increase public awareness to the issues observed in modern society. This combination of statutory control and public awareness could be the key to resolving the issues currently observed in our country and act as a template for reform for many more countries around the world. Chapter 2: UK Law on Animal Cruelty and the Need for ChangeIntroductionImprovement of welfare standards, and protection as a whole, may well be enforced by the protective organisations that work tirelessly in pursuit of their aims. However, these are stretched to their limits, both with regards to investigation and the aftercare available to affected animals. In 2018, the RSPCA was responsible for the rescue of 102,900 animals and the investigation of 130,700 complaints of cruelty from the public, all of which were investigated by a limited number of approximately 350 inspectorate officers. These figures show the struggle these officers face daily. Therefore, the real protection must come from reinforcement and development of the law. Improving the law relating to animal welfare will allow for the legal system to work in tandem with the protective organisations that currently lead the fight against animal cruelty.Outline of the UK LawThere are numerous statutes that cover various aspects of animal welfare, ranging from the overall welfare of animals in the United Kingdom, to more niche practices and regulated areas such as the use of animals in scientific procedures. For the purpose of this dissertation, the statute relating to the overall protection of animals will be analysed: the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The AWA 2006 is a relatively robust Act that aims at providing protection that covers all possible aspects of animal cruelty. In fact, upon introduction, the AWA 2006 was described as “the most significant animal welfare legislation for nearly a century”. This was because it replaced the Protection of Animals Act 1911, a statute that “merely protected [animals] by the coincidence of a collection of outdated laws written primarily to protect people’s property”. The existence of this new legislation ensured that this was no longer the case. The earlier sections (s.1 – s.3 AWA 2006) set out the animals and species in which the Act applies, alongside other important provisions. Animals covered are listed as any ‘vertebrates other than man’, giving specific reference to the Act not including invertebrates or embryonic/foetal animals. However, this restriction is only limited so far as the national authority wish not to extend such protection. The Act then specifies that, although it applies to all vertebrates other than man, not all animals that fall under this category shall be regarded as ‘protected animals’. The Act states that vertebrates that are deemed as protected must be; “of a kind commonly domesticated in the British Islands, … under the control of man whether on a permanent or temporary basis, OR … not living in a wild state”. The earlier sections also define who will be deemed responsible for the animals that fall under the Act. It states that a person will be deemed responsible for an animal if they are: in charge of it, the owner of it, or responsible for it on a permanent or temporary basis. Furthermore, if an individual under the age of 16 is responsible for the care and control of an animal, and breaches of the Act occur, the person in charge of the minor responsible for such a breach would be deemed as responsible for the animal also. After setting out who and what is covered by the Act, the subsequent sections (s.4 – s.8 AWA 2006) determine what acts would constitute an offence. These sections aim to mainly prevent harm coming to a ‘protected animal’ and range from the prevention of unnecessary suffering to the prevention of mutilation, administration of poison and fighting. Key points related to the prevention of suffering is that an individual can be liable for both an act and an omission that leads to the suffering of a protected animal. However, the individual would have to have been aware that their act or omission would have (or likely to have) caused suffering. Furthermore, the suffering experienced would have to have been unnecessary. Suffering would be deemed unnecessary if the suffering could reasonably have been avoided or reduced. On the other hand, suffering would be deemed necessary if it were done so for a legitimate purpose, such as: the purpose of benefiting the animal, or the purpose of protecting a person, property, or another animal. It must be noted, however, that the Act does not focus all of its attention on physical acts of violence against animals. Sections 9 – 12 (s.9 – s.12) relate to the promotion of welfare for animals. These focus on the duties imposed on the person responsible for the protected animals. These relate to the responsible person being under a duty to provide a suitable environment and diet for the protected animal, alongside considering the animals’ needs to: exhibit normal behaviour patterns, be housed with (or apart from) animals and its protection from pain, suffering, injury and disease. In fact, this introduction of welfare offences was one of the biggest steps taken to improve welfare within UK legislation. When introducing the Bill to Parliament, it was clarified that the creation of a welfare offence will allow for “enforcement agencies to take action if an owner is not taking all reasonable steps even where the animal is not currently suffering.” This pre-emptive strategy for suffering has proved essential in the fight against animal cruelty. So much so that the RSPCA, the leading organisation in this fight, reported that in 2018, out of the 1,626 offences they dealt with that fell under the AWA 2006, 674 of these were related to the s.9 offence of welfare.The sections listed above, not only the ones relating to the prevention of physical violence but those relating to the promotion of the welfare also, are only as good as the sanctions in place for individuals who are found to have breached these provisions. These sanctions are predominantly listed towards the end of the Act (s. 32 – s. 34 AWA 2006). The two sanctions are divided into two main categories, however, the punishments available are not exclusive of each other and can, therefore, be imposed alongside one another. The first of these punishments would be in the way of imprisonment and/or fine. Both physical and welfare offences can constitute a maximum prison sentence of 6 months. However, the nature of an offence determines the level of fine that can be imposed on an offender, with welfare offences having a capped fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale. It must be noted that the wording within the statute states that the maximum sentence available is in fact 51 weeks, however, this should be disregarded and therefore read as 6 months (as stated above). This is due to the penalties for summary offences being altered by the Criminal Justice Act 2003.The second punishment available is disqualification. Disqualification can prevent the convicted individual from: owning animals, keeping (whether wholly or participating) animals, or being a party to an arrangement in which they are entitled to control or influence the keeping of animals. A disqualification order can be granted as a standalone punishment or paired with the potential imprisonment or fine(s) listed above.The AWA 2006 does, in fact, cover large amounts of cruelty offences that can be imposed on animals and it is therefore difficult to critique the law for lack of scope. However, it is not the protection that the Act provides that is the issue. It is, instead, the sanctions and sentencing powers available to the courts when pursuing convictions that fall under this Act. In evaluating these powers, further light may be shed on the importance of rectifying the issues we currently face.Critique of the UK LawAs the sentencing powers mentioned above are separated into two main categories, each shall be considered in turn, starting first with disqualification orders.Disqualification OrdersThe power and relevance of disqualification orders being granted by courts can only truly be reflected by analysis of the case law surrounding this subject. Unlike other sentencing powers (which will be discussed further below), disqualification orders are not flawed by their issuing but more so by their enforcement. It is the unfortunate stance that individuals subject to disqualification orders are still able to be in close proximity to animals. These eventualities, perhaps understandably, occur because it is virtually impossible to monitor an individual’s every movement. However, frustration surrounding this matter manifests when an individual is apprehended for breaching their disqualification order, and their breach is quashed by the judge hearing their case. This is what occurred in the case of Patterson v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA).The Patterson case was one which could have been a benchmark case in UK animal welfare law. However, the judge’s ruling on the matter moved in a different direction and inadvertently allowed for less protection to be available for future animals in similar situations. Patterson (P) had been subject to a disqualification order which made it a criminal offence for him to participate in the keeping of animals, or to be party to an arrangement under which he was entitled to control or influence the way they were kept. Despite being subject to this order, the RSPCA discovered, upon a future inspection, that P still had numerous animals living with him, his wife (C) and their two young children. P attempted to justify this by claiming the title of such animals had been passed solely to his wife C, and therefore they were her responsibility and not his. Naturally, as it is rather clear that regardless of this title being passed from P to C, P was still somewhat participating in the keeping of animals and therefore, in breach of his order, the RSPCA applied for the animals to be re-homed. This re-homing process was never initiated by the owners and upon a third inspection, the RSPCA seized the animals. P was consequently charged with breaching his order and aiding and abetting animal cruelty offences (offences that P’s wife C was responsible for). Upon hearing the case, the judge, in short, deemed that C was in fact guilty of animal welfare offences. However, the judge did not deem P to be in breach of his order. The judge viewed that the order imposed on P was “not so wide as [to prevent] any form of contact with a dog or with an animal or control of an animal”. In order for a breach to be present, the defendant would have to have been “entitled to control or influence the way in which they were kept under an arrangement to which [he was] a party”. The judge stated that although P may be involved in the keeping of the animals, for example when C left the house, there was no evidence to show that he was entitled to such care or whether he ever provided this care in the past. Furthermore, there was no evidence of P being subject to an arrangement between himself and C to provide such care and “the fact that [P’s] presence meant that he was able to care in event of a contingency requiring care was not sufficient in itself”. Therefore, P was not entitled to, or did ever (based on the evidence provided), influence the way the animals were kept, leading to no breach of his order.The Patterson case is perhaps one of the most questionable rulings in relation to the enforcement of disqualification orders. It was the non-existence of an arrangement and the argument over P’s entitlement that rendered this case a failure. However, in the case commentary itself it was stated, and P did not contest the fact, that he “looked after [his] two young children when [C] was not there”. It seems that the judges in the case omitted to address this statement and it is unclear what they thought P did “when the children went to play with the animals or the animals “played” with the children.” Even from a layperson’s perspective, it is clear that P will have participated in the keeping of animals at some point in the past and therefore was in breach of his order, regardless of whether this participation was subject to an arrangement between the two parties. Its existence shows that not only are disqualification orders potentially unenforceable by way of surveillance, but they can even be unenforceable within the court. It raises the question to why orders are even in existence without the proper enforcement being in place. It seems that the courts, in many cases, are inhibiting the expansion of animal welfare by strict interpretation of the Acts available, with little attempt to further the common law surrounding this area. Granted it may not have been “envisaged that the AWA [2006] would develop its own jurisprudence and… cover many hitherto unforeseen eventualities, this [however] should not prevent the Act’s provisions from developing.”The Patterson case was ruled in favour of humans and in degradation of animals, with true speciesism being displayed in the courtroom. However, this is not the only case to do so. A case, heard a year previous, was not concerned with the breach of an order, but a claim to remove an order altogether. The case of R v Guildford Crown Court demonstrated speciesism at its finest and was another blow to animal welfare law and its enforcement within the UK. The claimant in the case applied by way of judicial review for a declaration as to the court’s discretion when making disqualification orders. The claim arose from prosecution of a traveller and horse dealer (B) for offences concerning the ill-treatment of three horses. The 3-year order prevented B from: owning animals, keeping, or participating in the keeping of animals and being party to an arrangement under which the offender was entitle to control or influence the way in which animals were kept. The court allowed the appeal and removed the disqualification order from B. The court even acknowledged that under a natural construction of the law the ban would not have been lifted, however, a variation had to be made to B’s concerns that his lifestyle as a traveller would be interfered with as he could inadvertently commit a “technical breach” of the order. Such a variation was made in light of the obligation to read legislation and give effect of such legislation in a way which is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Determining compatibility with the ECHR, the court felt that disqualification from participating in the keeping of animals would have disproportionately affected B’s private life. The court deemed this to be necessary as, under Article 8 of the ECHR, “everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.”, even though the court did not directly consider the whole of the Article. This partial consideration led to, by some account, an incorrect ruling of the case. Human Rights and the legislation bound to these principles are of course of the upmost importance to society, however, they should be interpreted in full. Upon further inspection of Article 8 it states that a person’s right to respect for his private life is subject to interference for “the prevention of disorder and crime, for the protection of health and morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”. It is arguable, that lifting the order would lead to further animal welfare offences being carried out by the defendant, it was, after all, his entire argument that he essentially has to interfere with animals (given his occupation as a horse trader and traveller), therefore, likely leading to further disorder and crime. Additionally, as discussed in Chapter 1, on the most part, it would be deemed immoral to neglect and harm an animal, so is the granting of the disqualification order the protection of morals and if so, is removing this ban also removing this protection? This unfortunate ruling and interpretation allows for any person who is in direct contact with animals, and makes a living doing so, potential immunity from prosecution in relation to animal welfare crimes. Surely those who are constantly involved with animals should be held to higher standards, not provided with a trump card to negate their irresponsible and immoral actions. This case was another example of humans favouring their own welfare over the welfare of animals. Alongside this it highlighted, once again, the lack of enforcement powers the legal system places regarding disqualification orders granted under the AWA 2006. ImprisonmentAs with the majority of criminal offences, animal related crimes do carry with them the potential for custodial sentences. However, the likelihood of these being granted is very small, even for the most graphic of animal related crimes such as causing death and mutilation. This reduced likelihood of custodial sentencing has put strain on the judicial system in recent years. According to an RSPCA report, which does not count for all of the UK prosecutions, but still provides a good base for comparison, it was stated that in 2018 there were 1,626 cases of cruelty offences contrary to the AWA 2006, with only 797 of these offences leading to prosecution. However, only 65 of these prosecutions led to an immediate custodial sentence being imposed on the offender, whereas, 159 suspended sentences were issued and 370 community orders. Furthermore, out of the 65 custodial sentences granted, only one was granted for the maximum period of 6 months, whereas 43 were issued for between 3 and 6 months and 21 for less than 3 months. This shows that the sentencing powers available to the courts are potentially unbalanced and in need of reform. Anger from the public regarding such figures has sometimes been directed at the Magistrates responsible for the rulings in these cases. However, this anger has been misplaced and the issues surrounding imprisonment need clarifying.It is true that the Magistrates are mostly in charge of the sentencing of the individuals, however, the lack of custodial sentences being granted is not a fault of the magistrates but the maximum sentence available to courts for these crimes. Currently, as discussed previously, the maximum sentence associated with animal-related offences stands at 6 months. This makes granting a custodial sentence extremely difficult. Taking this maximum sentence at face value does not portray this struggle, however, when giving any sort of sentence, Magistrates must consider aggravating or mitigating circumstances, such as: no previous convictions or a guilty plea. After consideration of these factors, a reduction to their sentence is made. Consequently, a reduction placed on a 6-month custodial sentence normally leads to a non-custodial sentence. An increase of the maximum sentence available in animal related offences from 6-months is likely to mean that prison sentences are more likely and potentially longer. Not only does an increase of sentence punish those who commit such crimes more severely, but it also signals to society that it will not tolerate crimes of violence. This seriousness surrounding violent crimes, regardless of whether inflicted on humans or animals, may act as a deterrent for future behaviour and potentially reduce animal cruelty cases observed throughout the UK. In relation to these increased sentences and the public scrutiny surrounding it, the government responded with some action. On 25th June 2019, the government introduced the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill 2019, which proposed the maximum sentence for animal related offences be increased from 6 months to 5 years. Upon first introduction the Bill looked promising, however, since introduction the lack of urgency surrounding animal welfare has once again been all too apparent. The Bill is currently awaiting a date for the report stage of the hearing after passing the Committee stage on 23 July 2019. However, this lack of progress in the last year may not be down to a lack of priority in protecting domestic animals in law, but is most likely to be as a result of parliament being preoccupied with “Brexit” proceedings. Whilst domestic animals have been specifically referenced, there have been some advancements in relation to other animals, particularly animals protected by ‘Finn’s Law’ or as the statute reads the Animal Welfare (Service Animals) Act 2019. This Act was enacted on 8th April 2019 and carried with it some amendments to the AWA 2006. The Act expanded the definition of what would constitute unnecessary suffering under the AWA 2006, with actions against animals, such as police dogs and horses, under the control of officers and being used in the course of the officers duties now being deemed as causing unnecessary suffering. It would be wrong to state that this development is limited, as any furtherment of the law that provides protection for animals is advantageous. It is strange, however, that this law was passed so quickly, and we are still awaiting an increase in the maximum sentences available for more general animal welfare offences. Especially since, although ‘Finn’s Law’ is enacted, it falls under an animal related offence, and therefore, still only carries with it a maximum sentence of 6 months. Perhaps the urgency surrounding the development of ‘Finn’s Law’ was as a result of further public pressure, with the initial petition leading to the Bill’s first hearing “topping 100,000 signatures in a month”. However, it may be the fact that the animals in question are at the service of humans. It feels like, once again, our own intentions (protecting those who protect us) are outweighing the overall protection needed. Furthermore, despite planned action from the government, the increase in sentence also carries with it further questions; is a 5-year custodial sentence, especially for extreme acts of animal cruelty, sufficient for tackling the problem? This is where the analysis of sentence lengths becomes more complex.The issue with analysing sentence lengths arises when considering one of the key factors of the legal system, ordinal proportionality. Ordinal proportionality requires that “a penalty should be proportionate to the gravity of the offence for which it is imposed”. However, for a maximum sentence to be deemed ordinally proportionate, comparisons to other offences must be drawn. General comparison would normally involve the following – “The maximum sentence for offence X appears too low when compared to the maxima for offences Y and Z”. It is beneficial in any comparison to include two comparator offences (Y and Z) as comparison to only one offence would make it harder to identify an anomaly in the system (a potentially disproportionate X). The issue is that comparisons cannot just be made by randomly selecting comparator offences, as these offences also have to be deemed ordinally proportionate for comparison to be successful. This problem exists as a result of the history relating to maximum sentencing and the reviews that have been carried out in relation to this, specifically a review done by the Advisory Council in 1978. The review, carried out over a 30-month period, focussed specifically on maximum sentences. Within the review, the Council described the maximum sentences as “governed by historical accident”, giving specific reference to “the lack of any rational system of maximum penalties”. The Council reinforced their claims by giving reference to the crime of theft that, with the introduction of the Theft Act 1968, faced an increase in maximum sentence from 5 to 10 years imprisonment. The Council stated that in relation to this, the increase was done so without any real reference to “any other branch of criminal law, except aggravated forms of theft and related dishonesty offences, and with scarcely any consideration for penal policy.”. This, therefore, backed up their claim of maximum sentences being increased without any sort of rational systems in place. This evidence to their claim shows the difficulty in comparing sentence length, as not all offences have sentences that are themselves ordinally proportionate. Furthermore, despite this report by the Council in 1978, alongside the evidence and examples provided within the report, there has been no further review or amendment of statutory maxima by the government. Therefore, this report provides potential evidence that ordinally proportionate comparator offences may not actually exist at all, making the debate for increased sentences continuously harder. In relation to animal welfare, issues surrounding ordinal proportionality may arise when applying the theory of Citizenship, as discussed in Chapter 1, to animals. If it were recognised that domesticated animals were to be labelled as ‘citizens’ then “they too [would be] owed full protection under the law and… the criminal law [would] be used to reflect and uphold their membership in the community. Applying this principle, does this put forward the notion that “people who intentionally kill a dog or cat should be subject to the same sorts of penalties as the murderers of humans?” In assessing whether this proposal is ordinally proportionate, a comparator offence has already been provided: murder. However, in order to fully compare these two offences, an understanding of the relationship between criminalisation and punishment is required. The proportionality of an offence lies, in large amounts, with the extent in which an individual has “deliberately and flagrantly violated well-established social norms”. For the offence of murder, it is clear that the maximum punishment available (life imprisonment) is “proportionate to the gravity of the offence for which it is imposed”, and is therefore, ordinally proportionate in its own right. However, if the sentencing for the equivalent killing of an animal were to be increased to match that of murder, such an increase, at current, would not be deemed ordinally proportionate. This is largely because the social norms surrounding animal welfare “are not yet well established… [and therefore] the guilty party is likely to be less deserving of punishment.”. However, this does not render the statement impossible, as sentencing guidelines “are likely to change over time in light of evolving social norms and patterns of socialisation.” This means that, if animals are ever awarded the label of ‘citizenship’ and their rights and social norms increased thereafter, the potential of equal and increased sentencing beyond that of the 5-years proposed may then become possible.Despite these difficult debates, arguments put forward in Parliament can result in positive change, regardless if they are deemed as ordinally disproportionate. This scenario occurred in 2017, when the initial proposal for increased sentencing for animal related offences was presented in Parliament. In this proposal, Neil Parish MP stated that “we should consider the message that it sends if the sentence for beating to death a sentient being that relies entirely on human care is less than that for, perhaps, stealing a computer, it is really not on.” Although this argument is logical in a sense, and did put in motion the Bill discussed above, his comparison is one that is legally flawed, as he has used, as his comparator offence, an offence that, in itself, is not ordinally proportionate: theft. The above discussion highlights how complicated making simple legal comparisons can be and what factors and considerations are relevant. With such a complicated process, comparison to any given sentence is almost impossible, especially in relation to animal welfare offences, therefore, maybe an analysis of sentencing needs to be stemmed from another source. Maybe it is not the comparison to other crimes that should instigate change in the governments outlook, but more so the need for change by way of public interest.Public Interest and the Need for ChangeChanges within the government and the laws that they impose on society have always been done so by way of public interest. However, the laws imposed most successfully are ones that aim to protect humans rather than animals. The current situation within the legal system and the poor sentencing powers available for the courts are leaving animals unprotected in many situations. This stance may well carry on, but, if so, and animal abuse goes unchecked, it may well lead to a less safe world for humans also, both morally and physically.This indication comes from the long-standing recognition that animal cruelty and interpersonal violence are linked in some way, however, research surrounding such an area has been rather sparse until recent years. The research carried out is categorised into three main areas; the connection between animal abuse and interpersonal violence (broadly speaking), animal abuse and domestic violence and animal abuse and child abuse. These three categories, providing the research behind them is conclusive enough, will show the importance of protecting animals in order to protect vulnerable humans from violence in the future. Animal Cruelty and Interpersonal ViolenceLinks between animal cruelty and interpersonal violence throughout history have mainly been focussed on extreme acts of violence and high-profile cases. An example of such a case would be the actions of Mary Bell, an 11-year-old girl who strangled two children aged 3 and 4, where it was later found that she had a previous history of strangling cats and pigeons. A further case of child violence and animal cruelty was the murder of James Bulger, where one of the children responsible for the death of Bulger, Robert Thompson, had a history of the killing and mutilation of stray cats and pigeons. However, these acts of violence and the links between them and cruelty to animals are not just contained to childhood acts. Ian Brady, perhaps one of the UK’s most notorious serial murderers, frequently enjoyed “tossing alley cats out of apartment windows and watching them splat on the pavement”. This rather dramatic wording of Brady’s actions shows the sort of commentary that has been used in relation to such high profile cases. However, these are not just anomalies in the system. Further studies, on a less high-profile level, have been carried out in recent years to reinforce this connection between animal violence and interpersonal violence.One of these was a study by Merz-Perez et al. which focussed on how animal cruelty in childhood can relate to violence in later life. The study was a comparison between 45 violent offenders and 45 non-violent offenders. It was found that 56% of the violent sample admitted to cruelty to animals in childhood, whereas only 20% of the non-violent sample admitted to such violence. This is a significantly higher percentage, one which strongly suggests the correlation between the two. A further study on inmates was carried out by Tallichet et al. which took a larger sample of inmates, 261, and investigated their history of animal cruelty. It was found that 43% of the male inmates had engaged in some form of animal cruelty with 63% of that sample reporting hurting or killing dogs and 55% admitting to abusing cats.Although these studies do not show a large majority of cases having a connection between animal abuse and interpersonal violence, there is still some argument to state that it is in the public interest to increase the protection provided to animals. As mentioned previously, an increased sentence could potentially act as a deterrent for animal abusers. Coupling this with the findings of the studies, which show that 1 in 2 individuals who engage in animal cruelty will go on to engage in interpersonal violence, preventing and deterring the early cases of animal cruelty could reduce the total amount of violent offences in the future. However, these broader figures on violence may not be compelling enough, therefore, some more distinct acts of violence will now be provided, alongside their connection to animal cruelty.The Link Between Animal Abuse and Domestic ViolenceResearch surrounding this area focussed less on general acts of violence (as discussed above) and focussed instead on family-related violence. One of the leading psychologists that have been researching this link, Ascione, provided a study that compared how different women had reported witnessing animal abuse in their homes. Half of the women sampled were seeking refuge at a domestic abuse shelter whereas the other half, which were sourced as a control group, were non-abused. Ascione found that the women in the shelters were 11 times more likely to report their partners to have hurt or killed a pet (54% reported compared to 5% of the non-abused sample). Furthermore, in relation to these findings, the recollection of stronger acts of violence towards pets came from victims of severe physical domestic abuse. This shows that not only is the presence of abuse linked, but the severity of partner-perpetrated animal cruelty may increase as the severity of domestic abuse in the home increases. Ascione also found, in the same sample, that the women seeking refuge were 4 times more likely to indicate that their partners had threatened a pet (52.5% when compared to 12.5% of the non-abused sample). However, in relation to threats this time, it was found that the stronger threats came from the partners of those who suffered minor domestic abuse cases. This study shows, once again, the link between animal cruelty and interpersonal violence but provides an extra layer to the findings. Being able to compartmentalise the acts of violence occurring allows for a stronger focus on reform. This research shows that the violence will not just occur randomly and in public but could occur behind closed doors. This being the case, it makes preventing such violence even more important. It can be seen from this research that introducing a deterrent to animal cruelty offences and, therefore, cutting the violence off at the source could reduce the cases of domestic violence observed. However, domestic abuse is only one half of family violence, there are further links between the presence of animal abuse and child abuse within the home.The Link Between Animal Abuse and Child AbuseAlthough interpersonal violence causes detriment to society and domestic abuse should never be taken lightly, the most vulnerable human victim discussed in the last three links is, without doubt, children. A study by DeVinvey, Dickert and Lockwood analysed 53 pet owning families being treated by a state child welfare agency for cases of child abuse. In analysing these families, they found that 60% of these households reported both animal and child abuse. Under further investigation, it was found that 80% of this sample had reported physical child abuse and 34% had suffered sexual abuse or neglect. This 60% of abuse is a larger finding than that of general interpersonal violence or domestic abuse, but all figures were in the majority. This link, and the links previously discussed, demonstrate evidence relating to the link between animal abuse and further crime and violence. ConclusionThe introduction of increased sentencing for animal abuse, essentially acting as a deterrent, will not completely solve interpersonal and family violence. Similarly, the introduction of such sentencing will not eradicate all animal abuse cases. However, it may work towards reducing the cases observed. Even if such an argument could be seen as subjective, there are certainly no negatives to enforcing harsher sentencing. The following chapter will focus on the UK’s proposed increase in sentencing with a comparison to global legal systems. Here, analysis will be made as to whether the proposed 5-year increase is substantial enough in progressing the fight against animal cruelty. Or should more be done by the UK government, perhaps beyond that of sentencing, to increase the protection available to animals. Chapter 3: Comparison to International Legal Systems and Proposed Changes Introduction The chapters leading up to this point have outlined and explained the need for change within the law. This change is not just limited to a philosophical level, but for the overall protection and interest of the wider public also. It has already been established that the written law available within the UK is broad enough to offer appropriate protection, it just requires the correct implementation. Therefore, with the proposed increase in sentencing in the Government’s agenda, an analysis of the animal welfare laws available on a global scale is necessary. This analysis will allow for assessment of whether the UK is finally on its way to providing sound protection to both the animals and humans affected in animal abuse scenarios.The UK’s proposed 5-year maximum sentence shall be compared to the sentencing available to other countries. Further to this, an assessment will be made to whether the UK’s protection should solely be limited to an increase in sentencing or, as is the case in other countries, should additional measures be introduced to aid and protect animals. These measures can create a more coherent legal system for the benefit of both animals and humans. Therefore, an analysis of these measures and the potential for implementation within the UK legal system will also be provided. Comparison to International Legal SystemsThe consideration of animal welfare laws on a global scale is inevitably a difficult task due to the amount of countries that exist, so to allow for varied comparison, specific countries have been selected from around the world to compare to the UK system and its proposed changes. An overall summary of European sentencing will be provided, including more in-depth discussions relating to France and Switzerland, followed by comparison to both the Australian and American legal systems and what legal measures they have imposed to increase animal protection. SentencingFigure 1: Maximum prison sentences for animal cruelty available in Europe CountryMaximum prison sentence availableNotesAustria1 yearUnder review to increaseBelgium3 monthsBulgaria3 yearsCroatia1 yearCyprus1 yearUnder review to increaseCzech Republic3 yearsDenmark2 yearsEstonia1 yearFinland4 yearsFrance2 yearsGermany3 yearsGreece2 yearsHungary3 yearsIreland5 yearsItaly3 yearsLatvia5 yearsLithuania1 yearMacedonia6 monthsMalta1 yearPlanned to raise to 3 yearsMontenegro5 yearsNetherlands3 yearsNorway3 yearsPoland2 yearsPortugal2 yearsRomania1 yearSerbia3 yearsSlovakia3 yearsSlovenia1 yearSpain18 monthsRecently increased from 1 yearSweden2 yearsSwitzerland3 yearsUkraine2 yearsUKEngland & Wales6 monthsPlanned to raise to 5 yearsNorthern Ireland5 yearsRecently increased from 2 yearsScotland1 yearFrancePunishment for animal cruelty in the French courts seems to aim more at depleting an offender’s financials rather than their liberty. This is because the offences can carry with them a large fine of up to €30,000, however, this is only an ‘up to’ figure. Therefore, there is no guarantee that any prosecution would impose such a large fine. Whilst there is the ‘potential’ of a large fine, the French legal system only imposes a maximum sentence of 2 years for animal welfare offences. Granted this measure is four times than what is currently observed within the UK legal system, but it falls far short of the intended changes proposed by the recent UK sentencing Bill. Therefore, taking only France as an example, it would seem that the UK protections and proposed changes are holding up against scrutiny. However, it would seem that France are not the most engaged country in the fight against animal cruelty, therefore, outperformance in comparison is not that great of an accomplishment. In a report published by the European Court of Auditors, it was shown that France had the highest reports of non-compliance with farm welfare standards. Depending on the area of agriculture, France reported non-compliance on a range of 25% to 65% of all sites inspected, this is compared to the ranges of other countries such as Italy and Germany that only displayed ranges of around 3% to 14%. SwitzerlandThe Swiss legal system is renowned for having great protection for animals. It is granted an overall rating level of B by the Animal Protection Index with their laws relating to animal protection being awarded an A grade. This is because the Swiss legal system acknowledges not only the physical welfare of its animals in its laws but their mental health also. This has been seen by Switzerland’s response to modern animal behavioural research that shows specific animals’ needs for social contact. In response to this research, the Swiss government stated, in law, that certain animals that were deemed to be social, such as Guinea Pigs and Rabbits, should not be housed alone, as social contact with animals of their own species guarantees their emotional wellbeing. Further to this, it is not just the emotional wellbeing of domestic animals that is important to the Swiss judiciary, but the wellbeing of livestock also. Provisions have been written in law stating that calves separated from their mother and kept individually should be kept in a location that is in eyesight with animals of the same species, in an attempt to reduce the emotional distress caused to the calves during weaning.Despite Switzerland having these extra measures in place, their sentencing falls short of the UK’s proposed 5-year increase. In Swiss law, as in all systems, animals are referred to as property. Therefore, as there is no separate sentencing guidelines for animal related offences, the laws relating to animal cruelty and welfare are sentenced in line with the laws relating to criminal damage. With this being said, in Switzerland, any individual who is prosecuted for an animal welfare/cruelty related offence could be liable to a monetary penalty or a custodial sentence not exceeding three years.Once again, at current, the Swiss law carries with it a custodial sentence that is six times lengthier than the UK’s current system, at 3 years. However, also similar to France, it falls short of the proposed 5-year increase for the UK system. In addition to this, it would seem the Swiss system imposes on its offenders either a custodial sentence or a fine, whereas offenders within the UK can be dealt both a custodial sentence and a fine. It would seem that, once again, the UK’s proposed 5-year increase is outperforming their European associates, but how does the UK system fair against countries outside of the European continent?AustraliaThe laws in Australia and the sentencing available varies depending on the location of an offence, as the sentencing guidelines are different throughout the different Australian states and territories. Therefore, for the purposes of comparison, a demonstration of the range of sentencing available throughout Australia will be provided. Starting first at the low end of the spectrum, if an offence is carried out and sentenced within the ‘Northern Territory’ of Australia, offenders will only be faced with a maximum sentence of 1-year imprisonment, or a maximum fine of $13,700 (with this maximum fine relating to a ‘natural’ person). It would seem again, similar to France, that the punishment in the Northern Territory is more focussed on financial punishment rather than imprisonment. However, like all the countries observed, the maximum within the Northern Territory is still twice as high as what is currently observed within the UK, but also, falls far short of the proposed increase within the UK legal system.This rather minor punishment, however, is only observed within the Northern Territory of Australia. The state in Australia with the harshest of sentencing, both in relation to imprisonment and fines is the Queensland state. Queensland imposes on offenders a maximum prison sentence of 7-years. However, this sentence is only available for extreme acts of cruelty, for example the killing or causing of serious injury. With serious injury being defined as “the loss of a distinct part of an organ of the body; or a bodily injury of such a nature that, if left untreated would – endanger, or be likely to endanger, life; or cause, or be likely to cause, permanent injury to health.” Any infliction of harm on an animal that does not fall under this definition, that may be described as ‘minor’ carries with it a maximum sentence of 3-years imprisonment.In analysing the sentences available in Queensland, even on a minor level the sentences available seem quite solid. The fact that there are two sentencing guidelines available for differing severity of animal welfare offences is an attractive prospect and is possibly something that the UK legal system would benefit from. This is not only because of the subjective nature behind how to classify severity of animal abuse, with a written definition removing such ambiguity, but, also, this increased sentencing for extreme acts of cruelty acknowledges the public interest argument put forward in Chapter 2 about the risks associated with severe acts of animal cruelty and interpersonal violence in the future. Therefore, the Queensland system seems to have a comprehensive approach on sentencing and imprisonment.The sentencing possibilities in relation to fines within Queensland also do a consistent job in protecting animal welfare. An interesting point in relation to the available fines is the differing fines available to both ‘natural’ and ‘legal’ persons: ‘natural’ persons giving reference to individuals and ‘legal’ persons to corporations. The maximum fine in relation the breach of animal welfare provisions for a ‘natural’ person being $235,600 and for a ‘legal’ person $1,178,000. This scale of fine has not yet been observed, in any of the countries or territories discussed previous and is therefore totally unique to Queensland. The inconsistencies of sanctions within certain countries and territories has already been discussed, stating that they are not always balanced, with most favouring financial punishment over that of a custodial sentence. It would seem that Queensland, as a whole, both in relation to sentencing and fines, has a successful system in place to tackle breaches of animal welfare. Not only do they have differing sentences available for various levels of animal cruelty, but differing fines also, with fines holding corporations to a higher standard than individuals, and rightly so, but the fines imposed on ‘natural’ persons hardly being in favour of the offender. Such large fines and large custodial sentences may act as a deterrent within this territory and perhaps provide a good precedent for further development within the UK system.United States of America (USA) The United States (US) legal system is one that operates in a similar way to the Australian system. Each individual state has their own legal constructions, however, federal laws are also in place to provide blanket protection across the entire nation. With 50 states being present throughout the USA, it would, similar to Australia, be unsuitable to assess every state law relating to animal welfare offences. Therefore, an overall assessment will be made. This will be done by focussing on the federal laws available throughout the nation, but also giving reference to some particularly robust laws observed in certain states.The US is a country that has advanced their laws relating to animal welfare offences at a surprising pace in the past 20 years, with around 28 of the 41 proposed referenda for the improvement of animal welfare measures being passed. The most recent development being introduced by President Trump towards the end of 2019. This improvement consisted of the introduction of a federal offence for animal cruelty related offences, with the creation of the Prevention of Animal Cruelty and Torture Act 2019. The introduction of a federal offence for animal cruelty reinforces the protections that are already observed within the US on a state level and allows for prosecutors to “address cases of animal abuse that cross [several] state lines”. The PACT 2019 has been described as a “necessary tool” to provide animals with the protection they deserve and allow for the “most horrific acts of animal cruelty [to be] prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law”.The construct of the Act refers to the act of “animal crushing” being an offence. Although this wording may be interpreted on a literal basis, the Act goes on to define what sort of actions would constitute as “crushing”. These being any action that results in “one or more living non-human mammals… [being] purposely crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, impaled or otherwise subject to serious bodily injury”. Alongside this protection against the act of inflicting injury itself, the Act also provides protection against the creation of “animal crushing” videos. Once again, this does not just apply to the creation of “video” in its literal sense, but is defined further as “any photograph, motion-picture film, video or digital recording, or electronic image”, so long as this video “depicts animal crushing and is obscene”. Therefore, the introduction of this federal offence provides wider protection for animals on a national level in the US, however, it is not just this wide protection that shows the strength of the US legal system, but the sanctions in place for the breach of these provisions.In comparison to the previous countries and states discussed, the US legal system carries with it the largest sentencing potential for breach of its federal provisions. A breach of the Act discussed carries with it a maximum term of 7-years imprisonment. In addition, the available custodial punishment also benefits from the capability of fines being imposed alongside imprisonment, not either/or as observed within the Swiss legal system. That said, the capability of fines being imposed alongside custodial sentences is nothing new, with such options also being observed within the UK system.With the above sentencing guidelines being discussed, it would seem that the UK’s proposed increase is good, but not quite perfect. The analysis provides some room for improvement, with such improvements being discussed later, however, maybe the analysis should not be limited to a comparison of sentence length. The US legal system and the organisations that work in tandem with the system have further protections available, protections that could also be of benefit to the UK legal system.Further ProtectionsThe further protections observed within the US legal system and beyond are sparse, however, there are two distinctive features which seem to lead the way in the protection of both animals and the wider American public. For the purposes of this dissertation, the two features that will be discussed are the presence of an animal abuse register and the concept of cross-reporting, protective orders, and upward departures.Abuse RegisterThe introduction of an animal abuse register within the US legal system was as a result of public interest across various states, with three of New York State’s counties being the first to act by introducing an Animal Abuser Registry in 2010. The counties that initially introduced this registry were Albany, Rockland and Suffolk, with the introduction in Suffolk being as a result of “71 per cent of battered women say[ing] their pets have been killed or threatened by their abusers”. The registries availability was then expanded across the remainder of the New York State in 2014, with the creation of the Animal Abuse Registration Act. The introduction of the registry demonstrates the US’s appreciation and acknowledgment of the research proposed throughout Chapter 2, that highlighted the public interest aspects associated with an increase in the legal protection of animals. This acknowledgement was not just observed in a single US State, Tennessee also introduced a register of their own in 2016.It must be noted, however, that the abuse registers available across States are not identical and for the purposes of providing an example structure of one, an analysis of the New York legislation will be provided. The New York conditions require that any individual, over the age of 18, who is convicted of animal abuse in the county is added to the registry for 5-years following sentencing or following their release from their custodial term. Further to this, a consequential conviction (upon release or after sentencing) of animal related offences can extend this period to an additional 10-years’ registration. Finally, failing to register or abide by the conditions in relation to the registration can result in a 1-year sentence or a $1,000 fine. It would seem, therefore, that the implementation of a register is not just to provide sanctions to those individuals who have already committed animal related offences, but, also, provide further, harsher, sanctions on those individuals who continue abusing animals. This is an attractive sentencing possibility to enhance the animal welfare standard within the UK and provides a further message to the UK public that cruelty to animals will not be taken lightly within the legal system.Currently, the New York system is only available for inspection from certain organisations. These organisations are referred to as ‘relevant bodies’ and include law enforcement, pet shops and animal shelters. With this being said, this access comes with specific responsibilities. The organisations are required to check the register before any transfer of an animal and are required, by law, to refuse such a transaction if it is found that the individual in question appears on the register. However, this selective availability for the register in New York is not observed within the State of Tennessee, where the register is available for the full public to view. The introduction of a register within the UK legal system, is an attractive possibility. It will not only act as a deterrent for animal related crimes, but if similar measures are proposed as in the New York registers, it would also prevent re-offending in relation to these crimes, as the registration period can be doubled as a result of this. Further to the register acting as a deterrent, the granting of disqualification orders in relation to animal welfare crimes, as discussed in Chapter 2, is a sanction that works well on paper but not so much in practice. The issues observed in the previous chapter emphasise the lack of surveillance available to the authorities to monitor those individuals who have been subject to disqualification orders. The introduction of a register would allow for specific organisations to monitor those who have been convicted of animal related offences in the past, and who may be subject to disqualification orders, but also prevent potential future cruelty of animals by those who are prone to repeat behaviour. Although, it would seem that the presence of a register would help in the ways mentioned above, such assistance comes with various downsides. The first of these issues is surrounding the availability of the register in US States, an issue that would have to be considered if such a register were introduced within the UK system. The issue put forward is that if the register were available for the whole public to view, there would certainly be some queries regarding data protection. It is argued by commentators that, with a register similar to that observed in Tennessee, presence on the register may amount to some sort of public shaming. Public shaming which would lead to an individual becoming “further isolated from society”, similar to those individuals who are listed on the sex offenders’ registers.This aspect of availability is only an issue that would have to be decided if the UK were in the process of introducing a register of their own, however, it would seem from past debate that this won’t be happening any time soon. In 2016, the UK government stated that it was satisfied with the disqualification orders that are currently in place, stating that these are a way to “prevent animal abuse, cruelty and poor welfare in the future”. We have already seen that this is not the case, and the enforceability of such orders may as well be non-existent. The government was challenged on this aspect in 2016, but they maintained their previous position. After their defence to the successfulness of disqualification orders, the government responded to the introduction of a register by giving reference to certain privacy issues discussed above. It stated that the introduction of a register would not so much shame the individuals on it, as put forward above, but could rather “facilitate vigilantism”. This is a belief that is not just conjured by the government itself, but one that is supported by the police also. It is the government’s belief, therefore, that the introduction of a register could do more harm than good, especially since they are satisfied that they already have sufficient systems in place to highlight offenders. In their report, the authorities gave reference to the Police National Computer, a service that “provides a searchable, single source of locally held operational police information”. In using this computer, it allows for authorities to “bring together data and local intelligence so that every force can see what is known about an individual, including any operational information relating to animal cruelty or mistreatment.” The issue with this system, however, is not the storing of information, but once again, who is entitled to access this information. The current system in place does not allow for animal organisations, who are responsible for distributing animals to specific individuals, to access this database. Instead, the process states that “if a person has concerns about another individual, they can approach the police who can check their records on the Police National Computer. The police may then take the most appropriate action.” This is problematic because it relies on quite a lengthy and formal process to take place. An organisation would have to be suspicious of an individual and be confident enough in their suspicions to pursue the matter further with the police. It seems unlikely, that animal abusers and offenders are displaying their convictions publicly, and therefore, it would be difficult for organisations to decide which suspicions are worthy of pursuit, especially since the constant checking of innocent individuals may well amount to the wasting of police time. This process, therefore, undoubtfully, allows for many animal abusers to pass under the radar once again, similar to that seen with the enforcement of disqualification orders. A change in the system, that allows for specific organisations to search a register for such offenders would not allow for this eventuality. Granted, it is of the upmost importance to not allow this register to be available to the public, to avoid the shaming and vigilantism listed above. Furthermore, it is important that the use of such a register would be done so in compliance with the relevant date protection laws. However, it is clear that the correct introduction and use of a register could allow for animal cruelty offenders to be monitored more effectively and prevent any further abuse to animals by their hand. Monitoring that would not be available to the wider public, but specific organisations prescribed by the government and acting alongside the police. Cross-Reporting, Protective Orders and Upward DeparturesThe existence of an abuse register is not the only measure the US has in place beyond sentencing. They also have a concept of cross-reporting. The motivation behind cross-reporting stems, once again, from the US’s acknowledgement of the links between animal abuse and interpersonal violence (as discussed in Chapter 2). The existence and “development of mandated cross-reporting systems for child protection and animal welfare agencies… allow animal investigators to refer families to child welfare services and vice versa”. Furthermore, cross-reporting legislation allows relevant investigators to “refer families with identified child maltreatment or animal cruelty for investigation by parallel agencies” for example, “suspected adult victims of violence”. The introduction of cross-reporting mechanisms, therefore, acknowledges all three links highlighted in Chapter 2, ranging from standard interpersonal violence to child abuse and domestic violence.The initial reporting of animal abuse to the differing authorities not only stops the abuse that has been experienced first-hand but allows for the authorities to investigate potential further abuse that other individuals or animals may be subjected to by a perpetrator. Furthermore, if it is found that the abuse spills out to affect others, the US legal system has measures in place to provide protection to those who are affected. Victims of domestic abuse cases within the US are normally granted protective orders against their abuser, however, these protective orders can also be extended to include the animal owned by the victim alongside the victim themselves. This is an extension that is available in 32 US states as of the start of 2020. These orders are, especially with the existence of the register that runs within US states, adding to the protection of both the victims themselves (both animal and human) and the risk of re-offending in the future.In addition, the deterrent factor that is imposed on individuals in relation to animal welfare offences is furthered once more with the existence of ‘upward departures’ in the US legal system. These are measures that are in place that allow for heightened sentencing available to individuals who carry out specific animal welfare offences under certain circumstances. These circumstances include where “there is a previous conviction of domestic violence; the animal abuse occurred in front of a child; or the abuse was carried out so as to threaten another person.” This further measure, once again, increases the protection available to animals. With the introduction of this third, and final measure, the US legal system is not just acknowledging the link between animal abuse and domestic violence, an acknowledgement which is not observed within the UK legal system, but the US system also demonstrates that violence and harm in general is not tolerated, regardless on whom this harm is imposed.ConclusionThe analysis provided within this chapter has shown that the UK’s proposed increase in sentencing stands up to scrutiny when compared with their European neighbours, however, further afield legal systems offer protection beyond that of sentencing which seem beneficial. The further measures observed within the Australian and the US system provide for potential to expand UK measures to a new-found level. These measures not only acknowledge the need for protection of animals, but also the links between animal and interpersonal violence outlined within Chapter 2. This progression, if implemented, will allow for further protection across the whole of the legal system, not just the areas relating to animal welfare. ConclusionAlthough the philosophy behind animal welfare may not be directly linked to legal innovation, the discussions put forward act as a foundation of thought. One that should be considered by each and every individual. Thoughts that not just further the government’s action on animal welfare, but ones that further all of the moral duties owed to another. It is clear that the past has not been kind to animals, but it seems like change is on the horizon. However, it is the responsibility of humans to ensure that this change is demanded, implemented, and enforced. Such change may be noticed in the welfare societies or the advocates that act on behalf of them, but the ultimate change must be observed within the English legal system. A system that, up until now, considerably limits the protection it affords to animals of all sorts. Protection that is not necessarily limited by statute, but by the sentencing powers available to the courts in relation to these statutes.It should be noted, however, that the protection of animals can be improved merely beyond the increase in sentencing, such as the introductions of systems akin to those within the US legal system. Upon evaluation, we have shown how these systems favour animals more so than that observed within the UK system. The particulars discussed have not been reserved to that of sentencing but also the sanctions in place to protect the wider public as well as the animals directly affected. This wider application has shed further light on the lack of protections available within the UK legal system and reinforced the arguments put forward. It is in the public interest, regardless of how you view the sentiency or importance of animals or their citizenship, to increase the sanctions and protections that are granted to animals by law. Currently, the 5-year proposed increase for maximum sentencing within the UK seems to stand up to scrutiny, especially with comparison to their closest European neighbours. However, potential improvements in the law are observed when compared to the Australian system and their split offence sentencing. Further to this, the US legal system not only contains a higher available sentence, on a federal level, but the further measures available to authorities extend beyond that of the UK. These measures are partly as a result of the US government acknowledging the crucial links between interpersonal and animal violence and imposing such protections to reflect this link. Therefore, the UK system requires change to be as protective and consistent with their international counterparts. It is suggested, firstly, there should be an introduction of split sentencing guidelines, enshrined in law, that relates to the severity of animal abuse cases. This introduction would allow for clarity within the law as what constitutes ‘serious harm’ and ‘less than serious harm’ thereby eliminating the apparent subjectivity in UK courts today. Further to this, it would allow for harsher punishment to those who commit the more disturbing crimes against animals, as these types of offences have been observed to lead to human-human violence later in life (as seen in Chapter 2). Furthermore, although the 5-year maximum sentence falls short of the US equivalent, it may still be substantial enough, especially after comparison to the European legal systems. However, if two separate sentencing guidelines were adapted, it is suggested that a 7-year maximum on the crimes that constitute ‘serious harm’ be imposed and allow for the 5-year maximum to be available for all other offences. Secondly, comparisons to the US system revealed that the UK system is deficient in protections outside of imprisonment. The introduction of an animal abuse register, for all relevant authorities, similar to that seen in New York, would be of great benefit to the legal system as a whole. The existence of a register allows for disqualification orders to be properly executed, as individuals subject to such orders, or past offenders in general, will no longer be able to obtain animals from the relevant establishments. Further to this, as we have seen with the Government’s response to a register, the current system relies on the police to enforce and investigate those who may be a risk to an animal’s welfare. The introduction of the register will allow for this burden to be passed to the organisations leading the fight against such abuse and reduce the strain on the emergency services. Finally, the theory of ‘upward departures’ being directly written into law, giving specific reference to animal abuse, child abuse and domestic violence, may contribute towards protecting those who are perhaps the most vulnerable in society. Granted, the theory of ‘upward departures’ is already prevalent within the legal system, especially sentencing, when considering aggravating factors such as previous convictions, but the introduction of specified animal-related offences eliminates the risk of judges being subjective in their rulings and may ensure the protection required is granted. These changes within the UK legal system may seem small, but with the correct implementation would evoke much-needed change. Change that would not just be observed in the fight against animal cruelty but one that would further protect all individuals who rely on the legal system for their overall welfare and safety. The improvement of animal welfare standards will increase the nobility of the UK as a whole, along with its legal system, as “the greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated”.BibliographyPrimary SourcesCasesPatterson v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) [2013] EWHC 4531 (Admin)R (on the application of RSPCA) v Guildford Crown Court [2012] EWHC 3392 (Admin)International LawCriminal Code of the French Republic 2005Prevention of Animal Cruelty and Torture ActSwiss Animal Protection Ordinance 1998Swiss Criminal Code 1937The Constitution of the United States of America 1789Queensland Animal Care and Protection Act 2001Queensland Criminal Code Act 1899StatuteAnimal Welfare Act 2006Criminal Justice Act 2003European Convention on Human Rights 1980Human Rights Act 1998Secondary SourcesBooksDonaldson S and Kymlicka W, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011)Great Britain House of Commons, Journal of the House of Commons (vol.55, 1799-1800)Kean H, Animal Rights: Political and Social Change in Britain since 1800 (Reaktion Books Ltd 1988)Linzey A, Why Animal Suffering Matters (Oxford University Press 2009)Singer P, Animal Liberation (First Published 1990, Pimlico 1995)Command PapersAdvisory Council on the Penal System, Sentences of Imprisonment (1978)House of Commons Library, Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill (Briefing Paper, No. 8612, 2019)House of Commons Library: Science and Environment Section, The Animal Welfare Bill (Bill No 58 of 2005-06)Contributions to Edited BooksElizabeth Anderson, ‘Animal Rights and the Values of Nonhuman Life’ in Cass R Sunstein and Martha C Nussbaum (eds), Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions (OUP 2004)Gary L Francione, ‘Animals – Property or Persons?’ in Cass R Sunstein and Martha C Nussbaum (eds), Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions (OUP 2004)JournalsAbigail Woods, ‘From Cruelty to Welfare: The Emergence of Farm Animal Welfare in Britain, 1964-1971’ [2012] 36:1 Endeavour Alasdair Cochrane, ‘Cosmozoopolis: The Case Against Group-Differentiated Animal Rights’ (University of Sheffield: Law, Ethics and Philosophy) [2013] Vol. 1, 127-41Ascione, Weber, Thompson, Heath, Maruyama and Hayashi, ‘Battered Pets and Domestic Violence: Animal Abuse Reported by Women Experiencing Intimate Violence and by Non-abused Women’ (Violence Against Women) [2007] 13, 354-373Alice Collinson and Robert Sardo, ‘Increased Maximum Sentences for Deliberate Animal Abuse: Part of the Armoury of the Criminal Justice System in Tackling Violent Crimes Towards People and Animals’ (The UK Journal of Animal Law) [2017] ISSN 2516-2225Criminal Law Week, ‘New Cases: Substantive Law: Animal Welfare: R. (Patterson) v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ CLW/14/45/15Darren Calley, ‘Developing a Common Law of Animal Welfare: Offences Against Animals and Offences Against Persons Compared’ (Crime, Law and Social Change) [2011] 55(5) 421-436David Hume, ‘Empathy and the Moral Status of Animals’ [1998] UCL Juris Rev 5, 101-115DeViney, Dickert and Lockwood, ‘The Care of Pets within Child Abusing Families’ (International Journal for the Study of Animal Problems) [1983] 4, 321-329European Court of Auditors, ‘Animal Welfare in the EU: closing the gap between ambitious goals and practical implementation’ (2018) ISBN 978-92-847-1150-5, Annex IIMerz-Perez, Heide and Silverman, ‘Childhood Cruelty to Animals and Subsequent Violence Against Humans’ (International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology) [2001] 45 (5), 556-573N C Sweeney, ‘Why We Need an Animal Abuser Registry’ (Criminal Law & Justice Weekly) [2013] 177 JPN 322Richard L Jr Cupp, ‘Litigating Nonhuman Animal Legal Personhood’ (2018) 50 Tex Tech L Rev 573Rory Kelly, ‘Reforming Maximum Sentences and Respecting Ordinal Proportionality’ [2018] Crim LR 6, 45-461Sally Case, ‘The Animal Welfare Act 2006’ [2007] Crim Law 169, 3-5Tallichet, Hensley, O’Byran and Hassel, ‘Targets for Cruelty: Demographic and Situational Factors Affecting the Type of Animal Abused’ (Criminal Justice Studies) [2005] 18 (2), 173-182Online JournalsMarie Louise Petersen and David P Farrington, ‘Cruelty to Animals and Violence to People’ 2007 2:21-43 Victims and Offenders 21 < https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15564880600934187?casa_token=woFCLAZhE7gAAAAA:Wm2uyZtF8yMOGi8HwrUV6AcPJWvG2rxK6IC7cqSplCdmna_AZehauRGgCFFMysrl5xQ8IPkIg3T3 > accessed 17 February 2020Parliament: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, ‘Animal Welfare in England: Domestic Pets Contents – Enforcement’ [2016] < https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmenvfru/117/11709.htm > accessed 3 March 2020Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), ‘Trustees’ Report and Accounts’ (2018) < https://www.rspca.org.uk/documents/1494939/7712578/RSPCA+Trustees+Report+and+Accounts+2018+%28PDF+1.07MB%29.pdf/3d1ed803-2485-9300-6058-1108409f014a?t=1560511878538 > accessed 29 January 2020Sarah DeGue and David DiLillo, ‘Is Animal Cruelty a “Red Flag” for Family Violence?’ 2009 4:6 Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1036 < https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0886260508319362 > accessed 15 February 2020WebsitesAnimal Protection Index, ‘Switzerland’ (Animal Protection Index, 10 March 2020) < https://api.worldanimalprotection.org/country/switzerland > accessed 8 April 2020Animal Protection Index, ‘United Kingdom’ (Animal Protection Index, 10 March 2020) < https://api.worldanimalprotection.org/country/united-kingdom > accessed 4 May 2020BBC News, ‘Finn’s Law Petition gets debate in Parliament’ (BBC News, 3 November 2016) < https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-37859146 > accessed 6 April 2020Dennis Parker, ‘The 14th Amendment Was Intended to Achieve Racial Justice – And We Must Keep It That Way’ (American Civil Liberties Union, 9 July 2018) < https://www.aclu.org/blog/racial-justice/race-and-inequality-education/14th-amendment-was-intended-achieve-racial-justice > accessed 1 April 2020Mihir Zaveri, ‘President Trump Signs Federal Animal Cruelty Bill Into Law’ (The New York Times, 25 November 2019) < https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/us/politics/trump-animal-cruelty-bill.html > accessed 8 April 2020Parliament, ‘Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill 2017-2019’ < https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/animalwelfaresentencing.html > accessed 7 February 2020Rebecca F Wisch, ‘Domestic Violence and Pets: List of States that Include Pets in Protection Orders’ (Animal Legal & Historical Center, 2020) < https://www.animallaw.info/article/domestic-violence-and-pets-list-states-include-pets-protection-orders > accessed 7 March 2020RSPCA, ‘What are the Penalties for Animal Cruelty Offences?’ (RSPCA Australia, 1 May 2019) < https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/what-are-the-penalties-for-animal-cruelty-offences/ > accessed 25 February 2020RSPCA, ‘Prosecutions Annual Report 2018’ (RSPCA UK, 2019) < https://www.rspca.org.uk/documents/1494939/7712578/ProsecutionReport2019.pdf/a2ae6cdc-efe2-f6bf-cac3-0fb53da37bf6?t=1556101041009 > accessed 4 April 2020Sentencing Council, ‘Life Sentences’ < https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/about-sentencing/types-of-sentence/life-sentences/ > accessed 15 May 2020 Animal Protection Index, ‘United Kingdom’ (Animal Protection Index, 10 March 2020) < https://api.worldanimalprotection.org/country/united-kingdom > accessed 4 May 2020 Great Britain House of Commons, Journal of the House of Commons (vol.55, 1799-1800) 362 Hilda Kean, Animal Rights: Political and Social Change in Britain since 1800 (Reaktion Books Ltd 1988) 31 Ibid 32 Ibid 33 Ibid 34 Ibid Ibid 35 Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 1 Hilda Kean, Animal Rights: Political and Social Change in Britain since 1800 (Reaktion Books Ltd 1988) 35 Peter Singer, Animal Liberation (First Published 1990, Pimlico 1995) 218 Abigail Woods, ‘From Cruelty to Welfare: The Emergence of Farm Animal Welfare in Britain, 1964-1971’ [2012] 36:1 Endeavour 14, 17 Peter Singer, Animal Liberation (First Published 1990, Pimlico 1995) 219 Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 2 Animal Welfare Act 2006, s 62 Andrew Linzey, Why Animal Suffering Matters (Oxford University Press 2009) 10 Ibid Ibid 1 Ibid 4 Gary L Francione, ‘Animals – Property or Persons?’ in Cass R Sunstein and Martha C Nussbaum (eds), Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions (OUP 2004) 108 Ibid 110 Andrew Linzey, Why Animal Suffering Matters (Oxford University Press 2009) 47 Ibid 31 Elizabeth Anderson, ‘Animal Rights and the Values of Nonhuman Life’ in Cass R Sunstein and Martha C Nussbaum (eds), Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions (OUP 2004) 277, 280 Andrew Linzey, Why Animal Suffering Matters (Oxford University Press 2009) 31 Ibid 30, 31 Richard L Jr Cupp, ‘Litigating Nonhuman Animal Legal Personhood’ (2018) 50 Tex Tech L Rev 573, 585 Ibid 3 Ibid Peter Singer, Animal Liberation (First Published 1990, Pimlico 1995) 6 Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 3 Ibid 4 Ibid Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 5 Peter Singer, Animal Liberation (First Published 1990, Pimlico 1995) 215 Ibid Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 6 Ibid Ibid 3 Ibid 13 Ibid 14 Ibid 13 Ibid 14 Ibid The Constitution of the United States of America 1789, Amend. XIV Dennis Parker, ‘The 14th Amendment Was Intended to Achieve Racial Justice – And We Must Keep It That Way’ (American Civil Liberties Union, 9 July 2018) < https://www.aclu.org/blog/racial-justice/race-and-inequality-education/14th-amendment-was-intended-achieve-racial-justice > accessed 1 April 2020 The Constitution of the United States of America 1789, Amend. XV Alasdair Cochrane, ‘Cosmozoopolis: The Case Against Group-Differentiated Animal Rights’ (University of Sheffield: Law, Ethics and Philosophy) [2013] Vol. 1, 127-41, 135 Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 61 Ibid 57 Ibid Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), ‘Trustees’ Report and Accounts’ (2018) < https://www.rspca.org.uk/documents/1494939/7712578/RSPCA+Trustees+Report+and+Accounts+2018+%28PDF+1.07MB%29.pdf/3d1ed803-2485-9300-6058-1108409f014a?t=1560511878538 > accessed 29 January 2020 Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 Henceforth referred to as ‘AWA 2006’ Sally Case, ‘The Animal Welfare Act 2006’ [2007] Crim Law 169, 3-5 Ibid Animal Welfare Act 2006, s 1 Ibid s 2 Ibid s 3 Ibid s 3 (4) Ibid s 4 (1) Ibid s 4 (3) Ibid s 9 (2) House of Commons Library: Science and Environment Section, The Animal Welfare Bill (Bill No 58 of 2005-06) RSPCA, ‘Prosecutions Annual Report 2018’ (RSPCA UK, 2019) < https://www.rspca.org.uk/documents/1494939/7712578/ProsecutionReport2019.pdf/a2ae6cdc-efe2-f6bf-cac3-0fb53da37bf6?t=1556101041009 > accessed 4 April 2020; Animal Welfare Act 2006, s 9 Animal Welfare Act 2006, s 32 Ibid s 32 (2)(b) Ibid s 32 (5) Criminal Justice Act 2003, s 281 (5) Animal Welfare Act 2006, s 34 Patterson v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) [2013] EWHC 4531 (Admin) Ibid, at [26] Ibid, at [21] Ibid, at [27] Ibid, [10] Criminal Law Week, ‘New Cases: Substantive Law: Animal Welfare: R. (Patterson) v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ CLW/14/45/15 Darren Calley, ‘Developing a Common Law of Animal Welfare: Offences Against Animals and Offences Against Persons Compared’ (Crime, Law and Social Change) [2011] 55(5) 421-436, 6 R (on the application of RSPCA) v Guildford Crown Court [2012] EWHC 3392 (Admin) Ibid, at [6] Ibid, at [9]; Human Rights Act 1998, s 3 European Convention on Human Rights 1980, Art 8 Ibid RSPCA, ‘Prosecutions Annual Report 2018’ (RSPCA UK, 2019) < https://www.rspca.org.uk/documents/1494939/7712578/ProsecutionReport2019.pdf/a2ae6cdc-efe2-f6bf-cac3-0fb53da37bf6?t=1556101041009 > accessed 6 April 2020 House of Commons Library, Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill (Briefing Paper, No. 8612, 2019) 5 Ibid RSPCA, ‘Prosecutions Annual Report 2018’ (RSPCA UK, 2019) < https://www.rspca.org.uk/documents/1494939/7712578/ProsecutionReport2019.pdf/a2ae6cdc-efe2-f6bf-cac3-0fb53da37bf6?t=1556101041009 > accessed 6 April 2020 House of Commons Library, Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill (Briefing Paper, No. 8612, 2019) 5 Alice Collinson and Robert Sardo, ‘Increased Maximum Sentences for Deliberate Animal Abuse: Part of the Armoury of the Criminal Justice System in Tackling Violent Crimes Towards People and Animals’ (The UK Journal of Animal Law) [2017] ISSN 2516-2225 30 Ibid 29, 30 Ibid Ibid Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2019, s 1(2) Parliament, ‘Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill 2017-2019’ < https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/animalwelfaresentencing.html > accessed 7 February 2020 Animal Welfare (Service Animals) Act 2019 Ibid s 1 BBC News, ‘Finn’s Law Petition gets debate in Parliament’ (BBC News, 3 November 2016) < https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-37859146 > accessed 6 April 2020 Rory Kelly, ‘Reforming Maximum Sentences and Respecting Ordinal Proportionality’ [2018] Crim LR 6, 45-461, 1 Ibid 2 Ibid Ibid Advisory Council on the Penal System, Sentences of Imprisonment (1978), paras 63-66 Rory Kelly, ‘Reforming Maximum Sentences and Respecting Ordinal Proportionality’ [2018] Crim LR 6, 45-461, 3 Ibid 2 Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 133 Ibid Ibid Ibid Sentencing Council, ‘Life Sentences’ < https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/about-sentencing/types-of-sentence/life-sentences/ > accessed 15 May 2020 Rory Kelly, ‘Reforming Maximum Sentences and Respecting Ordinal Proportionality’ [2018] Crim LR 6, 45-461, 1 Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 133 Ibid Rory Kelly, ‘Reforming Maximum Sentences and Respecting Ordinal Proportionality’ [2018] Crim LR 6, 45-461, 4 Ibid 2 Andrew Linzey, Why Animal Suffering Matters (Oxford University Press 2009) 106 Sarah DeGue and David DiLillo, ‘Is Animal Cruelty a “Red Flag” for Family Violence?’ 2009 4:6 Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1036 < https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0886260508319362 > accessed 15 February 2020 Marie Louise Petersen and David P Farrington, ‘Cruelty to Animals and Violence to People’ 2007 2:21-43 Victims and Offenders 21 < https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15564880600934187?casa_token=woFCLAZhE7gAAAAA:Wm2uyZtF8yMOGi8HwrUV6AcPJWvG2rxK6IC7cqSplCdmna_AZehauRGgCFFMysrl5xQ8IPkIg3T3 > accessed 17 February 2020 Ibid, 28 Ibid Merz-Perez, Heide and Silverman, ‘Childhood Cruelty to Animals and Subsequent Violence Against Humans’ (International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology) [2001] 45 (5), 556-573 Tallichet, Hensley, O’Byran and Hassel, ‘Targets for Cruelty: Demographic and Situational Factors Affecting the Type of Animal Abused’ (Criminal Justice Studies) [2005] 18 (2), 173-182 Ascione, Weber, Thompson, Heath, Maruyama and Hayashi, ‘Battered Pets and Domestic Violence: Animal Abuse Reported by Women Experiencing Intimate Violence and by Non-abused Women’ (Violence Against Women) [2007] 13, 354-373 DeViney, Dickert and Lockwood, ‘The Care of Pets within Child Abusing Families’ (International Journal for the Study of Animal Problems) [1983] 4, 321-329 Parliament: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, ‘Animal Welfare in England: Domestic Pets Contents – Enforcement’ [2016] < https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmenvfru/117/11709.htm > accessed 8 April 2020 Criminal Code of the French Republic 2005, Art. 521-1 Ibid European Court of Auditors, ‘Animal Welfare in the EU: closing the gap between ambitious goals and practical implementation’ (2018) ISBN 978-92-847-1150-5, Annex IIAnimal Protection Index, ‘Switzerland’ (Animal Protection Index, 10 March 2020) < https://api.worldanimalprotection.org/country/switzerland > accessed 8 April 2020 Margot Michel and Eveline Schneider Kayasseh, ‘The Legal Situation of Animals in Switzerland: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back – Many Steps to Go’ (Journal of Animal Law, Vol. VII) 31 Swiss Animal Protection Ordinance 1998, Art. 16a Swiss Criminal Code 1937, Art. 110 Ibid, Art. 144 RSPCA, ‘What are the Penalties for Animal Cruelty Offences?’ (RSPCA Australia, 1 May 2019) < https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/what-are-the-penalties-for-animal-cruelty-offences/ > accessed 25 February 2020 Queensland Criminal Code Act 1899, s 242 (1) Ibid Ibid s 242 (3) Queensland Animal Care and Protection Act 2001, s 18 RSPCA, ‘What are the Penalties for Animal Cruelty Offences?’ (RSPCA Australia, 1 May 2019) < https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/what-are-the-penalties-for-animal-cruelty-offences/ > accessed 25 February 2020 Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis (Oxford University Press 2011) 1 Henceforth referred to as ‘PACT 2019’ Mihir Zaveri, ‘President Trump Signs Federal Animal Cruelty Bill Into Law’ (The New York Times, 25 November 2019) < https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/us/politics/trump-animal-cruelty-bill.html > accessed 8 April 2020 Ibid Prevention of Animal Cruelty and Torture Act 2019 (a) (1) Ibid, (f) (1) Ibid, (f) (2) Animal Welfare Act 2006 s 32 N C Sweeney, ‘Why We Need an Animal Abuser Registry’ (Criminal Law & Justice Weekly) [2013] 177 JPN 322 Ibid Alice Collinson and Robert Sardo, ‘Increased Maximum Sentences for Deliberate Animal Abuse: Part of the Armoury of the Criminal Justice System in Tackling Violent Crimes Towards People and Animals’ (The UK Journal of Animal Law) [2017] ISSN 2516-2225 29, 32 Ibid, 33 Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid Parliament: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, ‘Animal Welfare in England: Domestic Pets Contents – Enforcement’ [2016] < https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmenvfru/117/11709.htm > accessed 3 March 2020 Alice Collinson and Robert Sardo, ‘Increased Maximum Sentences for Deliberate Animal Abuse: Part of the Armoury of the Criminal Justice System in Tackling Violent Crimes Towards People and Animals’ (The UK Journal of Animal Law) [2017] ISSN 2516-2225 29, 34 Ibid, 33 Ibid, 34 Ibid Ibid Sarah DeGue and David DiLillo, ‘Is Animal Cruelty a “Red Flag” for Family Violence?’ (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol 4, No. 6, June 2009) 1036 < https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0886260508319362 > accessed 4 March 2020 Ibid Alice Collinson and Robert Sardo, ‘Increased Maximum Sentences for Deliberate Animal Abuse: Part of the Armoury of the Criminal Justice System in Tackling Violent Crimes Towards People and Animals’ (The UK Journal of Animal Law) [2017] ISSN 2516-2225 29, 34 Rebecca F Wisch, ‘Domestic Violence and Pets: List of States that Include Pets in Protection Orders’ (Animal Legal & Historical Center, 2020) < https://www.animallaw.info/article/domestic-violence-and-pets-list-states-include-pets-protection-orders > accessed 7 March 2020 Alice Collinson and Robert Sardo, ‘Increased Maximum Sentences for Deliberate Animal Abuse: Part of the Armoury of the Criminal Justice System in Tackling Violent Crimes Towards People and Animals’ (The UK Journal of Animal Law) [2017] ISSN 2516-2225 29, 34 Ibid David Hume, ‘Empathy and the Moral Status of Animals’ [1998] UCL Juris Rev 5, 101-115, 110 PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAyAAAAHCCAMAAAAgvV36AAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAARnQU1BAACx jwv8YQUAAAMAUExURf///wAAAAgIAPfv95ScnO/v5jo6OoyUjBkZEGNja97m5oyEjHtze9be1ggI ECkxKSEZIbW1taWcpcW9vcXFzs5C5s5ChM5CtRkQexlCSs69EFK9EBm9EJxrzlJaUrVrYxBrY4xr EK2lpUpCQoy9MZy9Y2trpSlrpXu9Y0prpQhrpVJKUtbOziEpKc5rzoSMexlCe86UEFKUEM7vEFLv EBnvEBmUEJyczs5rEFJrEBlrEAgxGZzmtc69MVK9MRm9MZxr79YQGc69c1K9c2tr5ilr5pQQGRm9 c5wQUpzmlLUQGc69UlK9Ukpr5ghr5nMQGRm9UnsQUkIQ5ggQ5kIQrQgQrUIZSr0QUtaUYzGUY4zv MYyUMZzvY2ucpSmcpWvvpSnvpdZrYzFrY4xrMWvFpSnFpXvvY0qcpQicpUrvpQjvpUrFpQjFpXNr c9acnIRrWpRrnISUWs6czmNjWs7mtdZrnM5r75wQhJwQ5pwQtc69nM7mlLVrnHsQhHsQ5nsQtUo6 CL0Q5r0QhL0QtQgQSr29vdZCGc7vc2vv5lLvc1qMc1JCe2uc5s6UMVKUMc7vMVLvMSmc5inv5q3v 5pRCGRnvMRmUMRnvc5yc75xCUs5rMVJrMRlrMWvF5inF5q3F5py9nLVCGc7vUkrv5lLvUlqMUkqc 5gic5gjv5ozv5nNCGRnvUntCUkrF5gjF5ozF5kJC5ghC5joQGUJCrQhCrUIZe71CUvfmvfe9vWMQ 5ikQ5mMQrSkQrWMZSt4QUvcQtdbF786c75xChJxC5vdaOpxCtfcZOvecOpy9ECE6EPdaEPcZEPec EPdaY/cZY/ecY3tChHtC5ntCtXu9EEo6Kd4Q5t4QhN4QtSkQSvcQ5mNC5ilC5loQGffeOmNCrSlC rWMZe95CUvdCtfeUtffeEPdrtffeY7WUcxCUc5zvEJyUELWUUhCUUnvvEHuUEPdahPfF7/cZhPec hPeU5vdC5vdr5vfehJS9vff/Ovf/vSEICAgAGZycjO///wgAAAAAAEveWMoAAAEAdFJOU/////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////wBT9wclAAAACXBIWXMAABJ0AAASdAHeZh94AAAiv0lEQVR4 Xu3d3XrayLKAYbAlIgzYsqNjDuBwkidXlqNcA3c4d+N4nl1VXd3qlgTGTry2jb/XmbVAEkLYVaru 1g8zAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAvB9113Wbrqv96d/0hqsG/kfWc1P507+pCqte+1NcnGr1u1q9+f9UG3+7CYewTOdP o1145d/YN3uCrPzp3/SiBKmXbbs98ZvA+1OHP/CbO/j7TViGJZpBKizC5GHevMYbVpBVWPVZCbJp dNFHMuQjubY/2tu79/eb4Aky3/tz5wlyIrPO9k4qiH/QhT/FR/B+Ksh8/sMnBG2Y+M4ryO+w6rMS JO6L6NF/IE+3/ld7Yzt/vwkpQcos8gry1Z++yHV9qLaL1JbxBPntT/+mF1SQVKxJkA/kPVWQeZuH zh/0QZYhFNNL30kfZB+W/e5P8RFM9kHahUTnYiGz9h6mz0pLt3tvG5XO6IOIvBvyBxXEXzqsIP/f fZBNqNZ/o1eF/5X60f5opWrWaXhttT85lUATall6r/VoN9v5pMJZFaSI4T/og3iCvLcKMuv282ZB fnwoT1fhL1yoZl8fJeSXjy9KkMf97Ka53c0efFLhrD6I6PPBo/w18fROK4i4pv/xwUz2QXRXq39J +e/cYWBZtH6SxeW/yQQ5s4JkR0PuwoR3XkFeMoqFD2gyAbLhnqfzEyT6owoy/8enxijP+yA39w9V dTh2oK3ebHwrjiSIVpD68FDtvoXJ4tr/68Vn/Rx7SXrT60624Wt6TV9BNocqW6x0821qRt3t5CVH Pw/egyN9kOQFFSTymCmdW0H6htD38DRF+WYde/936/RuXSPaRuKz0qzYzmY7eRoWm8sj+XeTVZCv +/BxW/+ElcyXn7j//6XLt41uq65GflbyEnvFvLUU77ahSdrETYh9kMoLXlvFbVuGlXWzzU/dIFmp rzO8W7dMgxnf/8r5NHgb/kcqNIu7RWv/ffed8bPu7mRZf5VPKjw/iuWhllKirCDXP8JTt5amnOrC 02UdltYEsQcZ2UF7gvzIUnFvMem5vLR1zWbb8NQSJDxc5y+Z1dmzJuz4x3uD1vcFvrLuPuSrTPXS au/mc93jW7T+8De8n+MgVWyatSH4iz7IZpioi7DT9QTZ+sISeycSpGAjyoMu9j/haZYghW2R+uGg TUrrTGhOegrExJaV5u82/DxkyDvlTahvEoGLzUH+UBv7k3+vNzebemNh0tzIzK3OfLjpQ227keDU Ce0mRO/KXnFjj5e69G5jM0NUPd8H2aW9qtQB4SFkmVWPG3qt7cE9QaLTFaSkK56uILqtUwkyYK8a VxBh25xVG9UniL1umCD9kBveldAHaa5ne9mnbvTvaAnyb5grYS6hqH/OZTbTLLX46ASbLXwfaE32 nxq5nQSmzAwJYjEzLVaQWR330LYqDyGtIE9eIApWAr76EzeVILKjn0wQTcPjFWRypKHU6Et8FKtk NbBsROlKTybIT52Kd8ePg9Sz3Wo3q1erTfgzLiRu/7kPCSKBsFsdwswvOsHIn1kndCuJZvtrr6QH u9VEs5mydD3rvsjMcyuILJrqgWaFd461D5LS8mq/9MlCe/PjCnLftjHPGnnYaqXpE6TdblMXXl6e h6zwmNb+0n14KOQl/kg1+75zrVvpa5jf7tdf+jmaceME8aSzVNBf2d122X8c2ZXgHQp9kEfv8yqL xoWWllWqIEleQXpeQVbzR0+QuEtWIWqeryAa7zGS7+Sxh45EYWpgWde8jgtphPcJ0iyrh8rT0HfP qdUSX7G3Dk2MSSktz1cQO+Ox9hG1eWO1Lf4S9N38cejzpzn6K+sTZLGudrIvKSvIwoe7fHhhflWO NuOd8D5I+GMZryBPTUwQa0q4PkF++RTlCSJBVccK0ju3gtjwbgxeWbs/lGiNraZ4eCYL0JQgxUip x5ylg/IE8a26Cc80f45XEH9PPzksvo2nnFeKB3k4SLHYJZe3/uUP46hWWUFS8mrT1fRT8I74cZAH tdOfyv6wUkGa+ZfQ0Ghspto99LvFveyvq53+e9hZwFQSLFdPITj3O5trM0MGnldBZjexWOyyCuKP +jMZfYI0qDxym5QL5kgFsd2/8Pf4dkYF8dTxsT7pqpm+UTg8kh4PG8ks/1Vll0cN0jHydMszHO/G 9dS5WPpnlT+1V5AzaYLECjJ2xnEQexLfsbnxFUkfxCOozzHvIEjseYJkUaiOVJBYgXx9fYJMVBB/ izgnxH08D8a3WKviIMXiLHmdryxmpcgriCTdYb3dL/7ZrjynbsJkvC/pSPp+afyvpZ305SGFazkz ChNjUalmX5cSJx7XV+XMMyrIl/As9Rd8RRLl/rb9LtYbSdL28wTJT5MXz1QQTxCZfbyClKnjv6WJ CuLNvZQg/jppIo4TpFhnzIuECvIupbN5y/6t75Jjgnh4+8woTIztc48Ej2vv2ceZ5/ZBxOBNDrM6 XEbxmEWQTdANeFEFie/gCSKzyzSY6IOUFSRuwk97NtUHydboH0sXclkFuR58SkEf5F1KR9J3UvMl D/wP13YHFfucu9nmIG2dUYJ0h03KgZ/2ikM8J2k2+yoz03GK5ytIDN9w74+kryB9BPlbynv4o79f QcoEuQ45OqggmvTDCuJvJUlwsoKkytqjgrxL6WTEnf796mEOuHsJhNtRgjxJudj2RaIgwdtI2KSZ 51eQ7BCE6vMyLRCj8rk+iJ/GNaog/UksWciq5yrIbVlBNPYHKRYLqMw6miCSPHHkql1XlX98+iDv U1ZBbJR2MV8cDvt5ezg08+VXicTdQf6uu9kPbfEPEmQ2+zckyOogbbH1QZfubAXbkCA/+gQ5v4Kk CYGEsT+P++/Y5tKo9PVPV5D0ns9VED2oro6PYnkF8cNFvkGa9INRrPh5Zd2eIOMmlqzTNyis3Ten 5kDIe5TuavKgO01LEA0Aie9WQlbifjP7pvvU9USC1BJRliC72ZOGn6zgRnahEq2WTu0rK0j5PlIG 4kr8BMV4aE2j0GcNKojvxoftnvgOHpHfUsjqmoRXjbP7IOMKEjdNfn3xY01WEE+ekMFe0Kgg71JW QeTvpwki8b3b/pCo2h5mm+2y1iDUJpaE/OCUKI3kpc4+zK6Xv3zp1VZC4mdsYr2gD+KjWCq2QJT2 tGNGNKvNzbc0/KNlwxNkUEF8jVfdrO6WEnhZQKu+kx4HIdqvT/XO02qqgjzbB9lbeB98zfZO4wri CSLr9LcKGesvOrELwf+f1AeRCtK0XkFKEq672aqRkB9UEAmCxhJk9Le1sxTvmlUM4LBXPmJcQdK+ XGhHIq2loKnjcwbb7JEoES2fTqqDV5B4HMTzXGak3UNhfBzEr6uMfZCsOKS3avf97Vy0gEz0QTzp pILEDF5/7R7+DY/lQ8RyhXckHQfRIJcm9kSCSBB6eI8SREmRGEW/VRD1ilEs49OEpkE6gyNnFccT ZFBBpFHYk6A+2sSKu/KSbmu/t1d+NtjxPojIjrhai+1UBcl2ABkS5B1Kx0H8D2lNrJJVEDNIkLA/ lRgdVRDrg6i07x8t0ptKkP6twlCUh3gmtPqnK0gR930FGTexUhurMO6DeJ093gcphM/qH2uygnif ZoAEeYeyPojpK8hu7d3GvoLEk1pdmCizvTzU6xgNqYKkAHxhBZl1MXGtgsyy8+zNlb+TV6hhUqdT usTRBLH9fJ55jWelbmuZIE9+JL1sYumvzPsgmXhe2LiJlVWlycQkQd6hrA9iYoLUshP+L/xxpcGS sqcQuqypghxkVX4/XOuDqFdXkNQKiZm18cXMNg75HKkg+SW64yZWfxxE9BG+v8kC398+nrMc0vWx 7KTrr8eCPkvHq6Un0ekEmXWpwzLf+vmcxQnSeCfGFSTsjUOAWXT2FWSQIGFinB1iNSSGjROrc/og h9+rL/ITUqv3oBO/ZKex16tt2zTN9226cYhO02XidSC5nS7c7leaSoewqvgOVXhD71DcrBey1sVS 8uVg07/oSzb64Msqbna1ktfo5V8m2+LddnXYzOrKNu0u37R7eYkv5Gydv1d+/HK31w1c/JAF6tW+ bRdbLz14T3wAMw3Dyw5V/6Q+0GrJskyjN2VPIB5euwuL+UwNqacmNRfizvVEBXmJp8FdrE7Su9j9 D73i3f63G4hXiKNYMaBrPXqRmi4a+Zv/UtskXmoUxB2etBw0p7xJoQnyoz/sFVswJyoI8H7FUay1 thnUwupF1vmVyvBTZunceHc002g7w6aH9PKGuWZCM29tdfIvDtCORoKBj2DqUJkkSFZBvDKcpMv1 CZI6/hkqCD4kD+arqnqoKr1VrMS5NI+yBFnOG5uhS3gSmP1DfElro0g+T0tFM9/ufOaDJ8tf6oMA /1veB/FBJ7GzCuLj9Jogv+JBPxHHXlX/jYJh5CurILfZmG12bAH4cLwPUuTAqIKEOSI/bpzOlR0l iFSQPkF8vJ8Kgg/J+yBFgpQVxK7tcOdVELtjUEQFwUfmfZB0MZKexvryCpL1QbSJlSeID3xRQfAh eQW5rX5X+q+qtvP5qvrtp+PdyYSFzBQ2P94MTe3jxKqZt9Ij99O2l1W1etSZtjadaagg+JDSkfQ3 xnEQfEjpepA3dqKC1PW1/hucQ+JT/dkxdbVcv/0pTIf1cvfcluAypetB3tiJPsjPq8fm9vZW+zuZ 9lanhnPSjwpfPtL3ht6G9a78PGV8MlNH0t/CiQrivfthgoSpp8PSL1B52w6Oj0wMtg+fw9RpIW/h RAWZThDfrv4LaSf4WNsbx268aJwS8hm9tA/SNu2d/LR6O4SXeJMKEg/LvG2CxEub+r5O3U1dgYJL 9LI+SPwicnnddbo91VleW0FOJki8PVC8MuVtxAvcw2ffrO3uJW/7lng3nu2DtPvV/SZeKSXhWhsd cvI9a1t3v7eDq9XH3qYP4rH7to0fP6vAr5jxC1zi9TO4dKeaSu1yF2IvHkHvZotG2mSP80aC0kM4 7Evrw/pkRXltgpzsg8yeNEOat27u2N1IYsnwXwUV5LM4miD7KiRHV63SpeWHeGqVNjj8wXq2W3XW /Kjv0zdkjpw4WPH6Jpbodru3v2613u3S9nsF4QYLn8WxxpGeofh0WO+lj9Kkhtihv+PU9cyPwVcW 4XfLnV5lW161njkR6H9QQf4fUEE+maMNo5vZ8j9/WMfB4F28Afr8Nl2g/jWtYlHHsB47cSD6ZRVk U7/2mHZ9c+YN1OtTS3qC0Af5LIZX1DYer/OHGLnW9QgPqrR4k4aQblIrrU2VZjtMu/5s4bGTFUQT ZLf+uV6ul5tZ/bBv54/Nd7uXj/rycy3z1rJQ9fOnLPQzuwvVD33Neu3ppHcBks1YZLfh+SEvkRdJ odxtF63fWuvpftlqN6tptytvVm1kIXkT6ek8yf97CW31jZeH2U7fZLnuz16W1dqU16Yx3pmUBWYh YeDBve2/ySblRRXvujn/HhOkzxTZq8avE6hnhzLx+ktKxp6tIL7A4SHVpybd5s4c0iGRqxSX2RUt kj5ZZYuh6/fbvZp9tZlXNjF8YW/UWr75qqVRNRry67/mdPp98fHFASq1t7Emn9L3PKQf/rBd7To9 ChLvUiI73Lre7Kql3d49CL0RYdGRxobV6NaHmZMVRPsgvkDx5QuhVPQJEhMq3Ss6ZpU8rAfJ6kUk vEMTQ1wnDW6SfWV57fsJTZBYK6MfaRPS+WBeYU6M2uFD6S8S3EuToq72KS9SwyrG7uZbp/d0MO3h 0N2E3WZaQx2j9H5mzZ56mY5CnmqyTyfIuIIUwm1yswTxdIxr8Q9xpw/jx4hae23sV/n/PcqkfGdh LK+zBBmediAtK//08aIyL6endgj4UGIDaaHpoV9O08X21CqNSbVdtdxrG37gtv13uzqknEmtLs2U x63E9k1cQ9ZGH5lOEK8gxxIk7LKzBIljBl4ePNb1fcv6oWwI6qloTWkFGZ+XpvmVJ8jwtAO97NhX 470f39asL4SPLewVW4mxemUDt788ItovqYF9nvWsCwG79DVIt3q2CcNep1oc0wniwTpIkD6EbXFP EOtNe9vGU9HnSK2I/aLv1S59iZS9oEwH6YPEUrh9uK/WC539XAXRLPX7zoeaEb9IxJ7gIljTvps9 xa82u72WPWmz1JBOvYuz6O50s5Id6iENBv+S+LbV+n590skKkvVB5lfr7rq+9820GMwqSMzmMBzg W66lwlek38qRssXeq68gj3f7vbzOeyDeHKzv/XYVfYLMvnaH2JT72n2VRqZM82+fCknnhxFPFUx8 MNYC2fdjUdKDqHbXEgzrPoLO0/yjR7W7n9loTxXaOif3qOdWkPA9gGk/rwfQ8wQpAtUH2+Sxh3fs FIQZt/Li1ONu4i3ZRxuysUD3N/S88bZb1qnylLEp4Vemq8elCH/xLu2nLUC6Hy/NjuC/rQZr6uy2 1yFkTvZZ/Y0Hy3j4auz6An7K1XV4ZnPyBClOIwyv1gLgLw6LpC6XPvVPuIgHVdKNtpttFc6dCbw0 WcclfTZ/pnx3oMMGvmiWPfjwQmtkm5WQzc4D71Wa1U16uReQfhB0iu+BywSJzf1xgnilsEOP/kbh GzfiEIE89J2+dpU9DZpGv41DfsJTPeqXpWBQdLkWOg5nfGWeEv6lhHkO+PbJu3kfJ8sufHg+dpOV kL92oxOJ1RCfcf89yUOubIbFaNc08A2Lhzg85DUKiwoSh6vuY6DaULCnwYC2nbL1uNiHdzqwJ56r IHFbF/FBPg8fX4iyvIT8LbGAnN6lxk5FsZB3HayXXFYQ7zs8Zn2QEMh9JPsnsb38dLZ/SRUkfjGn qj1nEhutLSvI1Nm8nlhd3/PBBfE/eVZC/hI7HqJOdkHSWFk6CK58W6zDfG4FiXP6TySmK0jW+Cry Mh63iXTNz1aQNGZ2zqfFh+OdkLpsg0f7w/LfxWK7/rLbVavlPsZbs1iuf8uk9XIvc3fDwDLr2fXa Dq2dHvV8soXLwIpDTNZ5KStI7INoYPvZJzFB/JDELkwO6/MVbdcF6V9403JwGmVd7fOaowlaVhBP kLIf7oka+HbiYkiktIfZdRzEKYwGZDZrPUp+KPa7IraTCtvN7EabH8+0OWLTPzv8HIuZhf5kBbGm 0aCC+HiSX+ISVucrnxgmmKogpquWPs8Gk5+vIMWnDwdicEGWeoyvPI81kiCrdRi03nSH+8MmDOyE uwzKpPv7blPrIQWZHu7hNvCoK26eCxmPOak0fvygjvkROu5lBYnFJRvFiglSnFViJSat/CqOSan8 AJ/1ZVz2HbVZx8gf+q7Cnw3aUdmHz9Icl2HThR39iH4n/uF23rbp79/uHyyIDv0+tmnbR91B6zer j0lpqp9rc6RDdvNmfd91u2V6Hvb7Z1eQ1J1RHtDxoGX8fn/5uMswLuyfoE+K2fcmje3Gl8ncsoLE dqi+501aZ8rx+VXZZMNFqOK1gyWJ7HG763Zd55dXOOnClN+Bm6Rv1j9usnEnvAiUFcT7DlfjUSyR bVgM9ViN5tvdZrM5rPQ1+oJ4amJYyuir2/X9pr7pvBZp8fOa4QkSx/r+2y4X2XekpJzuJ+FiHAvQ ne8vF/vlatd1m023imXibn34Js8P1XIbJi2zE0xKZ4zqeKAP+S3hywoSz8KdqiDZnrx/13E2H6sg 483QElZWkGJ1/ehD+hWm4/K4HHnLJHfwgOv30NKs0HDVS0d6tvfcH/0mhTPO3BsdgDCxNV9WkIkj 6X2C9Ofb9u26Tdq7J7r5E8dBRlthJaysIMVIcP/RYvkcDWrgEhzZg08liPWE/ZHzBOmbGaW8e3yM 3eCqdJtCvKwg+Z5/lCCpQZWP3o7HD6yC+OZmCVJcsyiu7IMPKkh+HUnWnvIPUP6qcCHimM1A5y2H MsT3w5NzLWKkSTOdIDGwnjEcRcu6LmUFmTiSHs7FMrEYFsO6dbyS3kmHSYT15GfeDo7m+KkmgwqS 51v/Lv6+/ZnAuCTe3BiKCfJMBYkJMghxl+3eT+tvO/d4l918RNr37aJd3LXxS6r2+rRdaJDr3Ujk J98+nzQoW7X1zVV/Y5NsPVG928YP0exjBeu+36lwQYm69lOdm2Xf4fBO/dkfFh/L5JFwqRxh+rCC 6PXbmZMJckYXvbc57Krdoct26n9P3R12h8Pm2VHYsNwzTaXN/f0h/62k8xVxmaZHoGKC5DtZ21mW EWw75/ZIT6bvLF8ybwVykPBiTZaQa285lAmy93tIJacS5HOceOEFZNA3wwWZLCG1J0jZxBr1QSwx mqc4kFP4HAXEdy9nDGjjo5ooIbJDtJgfnPA66oPYQrf+/6XPUUDi3uVN+k54H/oTopKYIPmxNDGq ICExYrkpfI5RHT+MzkHCizY+3yR2K6T1lBv1QWKCxIN0vc9xWKD2UwjK/QguzWiUNibIf2UTa1RB QuWYSpDPcVzZTwDjIOGFiydyJ3eeNIOOxKgPEhIjjglnPkebIzZOP8fe4DMb9iHisb/B6OWRCvJt eG/0eLb6pesW5sxTavBxDW89G88/HFWQQR8kVJB4XkovnhsCXIbBOYt7P0drkCBSMMpeezgVMJ76 m7BLxaUpj2RsvaYMzjCShfyRiwlS5tcnaWDhMynP6pUEsbv2jCuIP3Khc76LN3tznNiKy1OMZMWr aG+3X3b3h677urEvfw3XgzzVMqG7v99Vv0JWPZQvLi7IAC5EPlS7Ht+H4Xax1vsZbFbpDnJJVSTI gtMucJGybsh6+na90i8ZDHeZVX5pOx0QXKjskusi5J/1I08nOiC4VJt0j6zfs83dom0Xd4v9fiv2 9r19yWKhE2Xqol00i/YhSxAuHMLlSmUj3kYks6lCE6z9MXFiRbqmpL98G7g88YBfUQfqmZ+y2C3m TbwM6jpOVNcxs158hPDLqiru0jCrqlWlX985q+VB9qNZedAHfRdHl8heG5cK6p3efH6xXY2afNXv VTWauFltZen9Otx8eFb7u+Y/v+0+Dbp9g1dPbCkuVTpnpJEG1qK9axvrlTft3uJYv965rrbe4Gqa u+93i7u2jV8i/m9YyQvoq+7ybr3eoMrSc3Cho96Hyg5H9hcq6tBZP6Rsrbw4c5OdXtysi2EDy+XB 8Z10y+z5/NHujDc5RGF5of20wZmYgy2liF60icsLo/Bds+Mz25NFeXL8Oex1ecBpgliYD04P02ta n7SP1BcpPVOyP9Svqe0jaPXgQxT3BA3bXxSB2r81IdBVHk8QvQpgcKBnIpVxuU4kQPNruZy6PYNr iz31eUIWZC26VEGuY1kKLOw0JfqrgG3QLbWxtIf0jz261sVyeRvOz1Av2oLl8ncyZfJu3McqSPzy XcfVhRfuRIacVLSUzhVe+l8fwmUFWVduZf2SB104tvHDwcl4twTbjdvYgt/LtFkeuq7b6S3p8g2L vaxsmjW6mmpTbw5ryX+tILW/rZWiuBH2kmMVZOkLVRV9kEv3ugz5/pr8mHmZ6IuPJkiIc5017A7r snEPHdpR8WI+659YWyp0o9JtRq6r4l6LGuBaBbIgt4tZYjOs2+YnaFpTq4j4Y30QTvD/RE70Q44a nPd7Ln91H3N9BdHJ2a13jYW3P7YWVioF2kyyZLGY7r8zR9hpZE7LTqunVmbd9H/kadbkytPpm66s SJBjFWSQyrho47s4POefV9WPUEEs0mM3JPVBrLMwDDtrIIUIjv1oP2SjS3/RB1b/+qGuAc2jH3bm cr+INsmOXFV+VgWxPsjRd8QlGlwA9axXd0z1xQeN19gNSRXkRvsgw/a8BWxoPcUkDvt+65DoKmx3 fvRwjM3dWBL1KWEpldeN3lkVxHr0VJDPxYL2bIOIeQF9m86i27shqQ9io1ijsNPZoTVnkSr/haFd ffRdH9i6hnmVaFbJy61bnlLCui9NdgSyZwlZtPN0A6b6IFSQT6bzJv45Xh8c1jrpQqcnhF2qIDaK td9uf9m/GL22pD7R0G3se9YtiXRrrbJYzuiDSbqYpp/+f8rqeK3YPj8uH4wrSPHKwBKk39KXHwzC RzTxzU/Tig7xS3k7SstB6HpogtgDG8VKbJRX2L5fE0gbgXvrUmhi9X2F1FmfouXFKs4XedCPnHXh aIxYVGV4j/sguqVTfZDkT34b+FDOG+4tvobmxXQNElL2ZYLWDekriM5K0r5dF9QuhqbvztJE64U2 ncK4lA5JheOFE/RFFt2DVtFG3zVoiwbV+RUkiamMy7c7oyMy2Ju+lJYJDUm7qL2V3beGqvVByjsG p7DTrNWD6XrPz5sQmxLA/X79VAWx3nQId10sH5ne9fUybzCO+yATFaRMECrIJ5LtWaelk3tfS1di IWXlSiKvTxBt9xzq6/CjU4x3wrVjrQFuXfUQoqFDr+s5dkxG+yd6IolIo17JTbUPN9q9zU7dsgpS LHasguxsO+WfT8TnYJ3ioxbFaYCvoRUk7HOtG7LrE2R6FGt2rYVlaXmgnXJtW91ZuvwXLoX/LQ+P fWO5Bne7Xf5abpdaQcbVr9Il8tNxz6og1gfhSPondaqZlU7neD1dTUgQ64Y0VrOsLN3o/nyivaJt oYV1RXTPHgZsNV382IdNmN4wG87NjS+ft3ZdVoCm+yCD83U5DvKpjc6NjYpvmH0tzQLfQ1urZ5Eq yNS5WMrCXJcNnXINWNvxx8aePr6dbOiMh+Xi4fueVqRslPisUazQxPIn+Hymi8jfuexB1xTb+Nac 055H6IPos4kEsf11vx/XF+mzdHqunQRQ9kJC48tqy23zeBX+ZYtlQ7s2/uuPhb1mVEGm+iBUkE8s u+Au8m/a/2NxFMtYN0QcPxdLxUIQtsDqjuhHrixdFn3P+mkVAtpSqb5+moV/VolsHZvsw4QGXHJ+ H4QK8qkdLOqS5i/0PgJdWwpP64YICzYbxZpKQz8JKzaE/DV9a8mCWnbzIUU2qybUGvsyqGy7LQEt 1OUFe78W3YpYViDOPw5CBfnkPCzNthj4/CNlT9zLQT+KddsY+b++3eNX+8XduFe3bJNiUWkW+4Ul tgW0XWyVD2/ZCzUvLMAf77ZLvbhKZKua7oPMwzbpj25FeL1tpfwbNO/wWdzEzvpf6ZxHusJsfWFU OYxipfM/TNYxCAdn4i47jE0VUTk809IqiEZ2cQTRgl8Lj5ecKO+5T1eQTEqQXral+FS+aow145Gf P1H0QYTtoO0tynOx8qEly6J+oMqWK1s9ZafpURPOuttlO0jfS6P5uhjeKj6f5c6oD5L5JZPKc7FI kE+san+UJ/P9sbZpm7zBttEJoQ+ij+RH/8l/WYnopMFlbZtgqU+Hjb6NXl2umkW4llyXGtxWu9IX Wnno4tLtMuWd+SZLlOte6Db5j/zTxKzDQ/nRf/mWAn/qyQdhe9lznSk/4f8yJ17Se+oOh8MmS+jJ pZLN4dAN00yqw+hFMsE3y36ULJT/AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPhEZrP/A19u IdqgAiSrAAAAAElFTkSuQmCCiVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAu4AAADCCAYAAAAW7EeuAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAARnQU1BAACx jwv8YQUAAAAJcEhZcwAAIdUAACHVAQSctJ0AACubSURBVHhe7d3ZVmNXnudxv0R1V1d25eQhgiCE QEjiaEQDEgiQhIQQIAEiGIKIIMLGdtgVLg+V2VkXedGr+8pPcO6qqi94hvME5wnyUXbv30ZHJsJD pStjwPb3s9Z/HUkIUABe/u2t/977LQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOCGq1YbMdX4LgAAAICbppirNKvluq/KecXm +GEAAAAAN0WxaEN7pX6Z9QomlymajJe/9JI5wjsAAABwUxSL1VguV/KLhYpZqiybRXtNJhZMOpXx EwmPthkAAADgJsjnS7lquR4sFqtutn1+Lm008z4bT4aphDccPw0AAADAmxQF93yu5EL7QirrrnPx pEnMpvxELMGsOwAAv0SHh4ex0eg4d736/X6u272qFz+mGgxG36p+f+Dq+PjsWxU9J7p/dvw49/jx havT03NCyA3UaLRjqvFdvEa1Ui2XzRSDXHbRtcgouHvpnEK78VLZYD4+nxs/FQAA3GSDgQ3aNgS/ WArGCsJnZ4+fC9Ivlj4WBfCjo6Ph4eGRf3h4HKhGo6Nge3swqc3NvqtOpxusrjbdbV2jarU6Qbfb C9rtblCvr7r7a6tt+7FW0FhuBp12L9jsbgfD4chdVXrs5PiB/frD4PTkYfDo0Qf+ycmjYRTo9bom V/tviSr6dx6PznKfffbl9xYDgb/d+kq7WSpW/bVGy9ft8cN4TRTc89lS4C3kJ8H9zu2Ymbk7x4w7 AABvyvn5h7Fo5tmVDaiqKFj3u4NvZr5taN3bOxru7R36e8PDIKrmmsLzdrDdHwbL9TUXoFXpVDao 11YDzdypCoWyq4xXcFd9TrfTD22YNuVSzVQqS6bX65udnYG79vs7ptPZNLu7Q7O/PzL37h0bG9LN xkbXPT4c7rva3Nwy7XbH7Gzvma3errGvwdjXYo6Pzox9faax0jSrjZbpbGy5+3reRtt+HVv63qpa bTXUa7XPGw8AxgOBZjeolOvuqsGASsG/3xsER4engQ3q7vZnz74Mzk7P3fXZsy/dQEDhX6WgHw0E otJjqsPDUwLQCxTUVxvtSzsAM6XFJaPwzsz76+V5xdj8XPrr5Fw6UKVTmWBuNhUotM/NJBlIAQDw KigYXjx+movqenh8dPZk+OTJR/6Txx8GqocPngQHe0eueps7Qbu16UJqtbLsygVyG3C104SC9vra hrHB2yhgrSyvu+tg98AFY/v1zIOzxy4UK0QrUDfXO+72cDAyB/tHrg5HJ2Z0cOxuK5gfHh6Z5eWG C+uDwZ4pl6vm4ODQBXeFeQX2tbWmC+q6bm/br9tsuzCv16MwrtfR3xq4oK4Qb1+7sf8eF9pPTx4a vX6FeX3f+6ePXMDf3dk3548+cPf1uO7rNZ/dP3dfxwZ399r39+65x//5s6/M0b377nH9G/V8/Sx0 W58/2N0P9fMq29CvqlUbk9saHKj0c7bh3z86OhkqxOt3cn0Qpfuawdc7HONf58+eArqCem2p4X5H yXnPZDKFoNFo0prxmmn3GG/ey81HFZ/PMdMOAMCPpCAX9WxfbzuJ6pvHT4a2fM1sq23Ehm1X0e1q uR4q6EbBWmFXYWmpuuLu62O6rUAalQKwwrkCrEKrwrKuCuVRSFdw132FZhv0zUI6Z9Qrq7fdFZoz XsGVQlkqmTHpVNaUFmthKpW5eo3lqq3KcxW1zKi6XTug6HQnpVYZldpkosGGQrOuKs2Yq6IZf1e5 UljIl90ARK9RM/L6NynY699gv84k9OvfosGA/v0K8RqQKLTr56XnKbRrAKKQ/9mzL91z9XPUczQQ ePTwfaMg+snTz9zzooGLvqc+P5sphtE7Fnr3QjP/Kt22zw2effq5f6YZ/GttO6qr3/PPK9QroCuo 6+dlfy7u7yMxlya4AwCAm6nXG8TUmhIF8Ou1uzsabm/v+Qp0KhsmXRuHmw0fVxTQFYYVqhUSP3j/ Y/Psn76YzHQrTCp0K6C//+Qjdz8Kovq4HlewVFBVENVtPV+lQKvAOzebctvDqX1Er8G1vtjSa1AI VauMSm0yuh+FZgVSXdUyo1nn/b0jf7R3ZAcZGnSoB/7bNRppIHJV+tm82Dff7XZzzWb3W4+rop9d 1PKjEDgaHQ0by+u+De+Tn5cdcExKrzcK/lFdb5XRv1elPmA7KAm1+4YGOVHg1+BGj+nnpwGLHTiY Dy8+cT9XDWw0SNBAQOFe7wTotmbq9bvQQCEK+Hpc94fDw3Cwc+B+tqVi1ZV+1oPdfV/vnFwfuEXB /vwn2Guv340Glgrt827f8Kwd5BXZOxwAALx5AxvSB30bLMe1298b2mDoKxyqd9oGQRfWNGOsWdhx L7ab3dbst0KgZogV/u4dnrrbUbuKnqPwpxCodhA9XzPBCt0K5/q4gqVmlRWQUsmsm/XW91SPt64q G9xdRYMC3baf60KjBhIKxd8VmF+sKFjrGpWC5uEbmjW+2rWk6X7uk4Wn411nVHpcrzcK/ArDUW+6 Kvq4fme7djCln4+CfFReOv+tilplNIs8n0iHCqcKqXpXInrH4uOP/sn93vR71mBKtzXo0u9Ys/r6 /eq5+h3rth2AhFGYV2lgpIHHg7Mn/pkN9VGQj0q7+Ix/BDfOysrasLbUCPUOjQvvsyn7N8m+4QAA 4DVTW4MLhOOgq8Cn2XPNmkftERvtnpslV2BT0I56sxXQ1LqisKZZW83ERqFOj2mmV5+n2V5VFNAV CK+H8mh22X5dd9VjbvFlq+v3e7tDvS5VNHvrAnajO5mpjkKsSu8MjP9pv3jtdu+bAdi12f2otMg3 +tm6svc7nf7Qlvv9qz1E707MxpNBPJ4M7dXN1EftPJrNj9qPtGAzCvl6p0S39djj8ws3SNPj0fPX 1zZCvbvhBl7278v+LQWj/SNf7zjo9xsNUm7CTjgaSFXLdb9mX3tq3nP7huvvU/3V46cAAAC8fJpF jsKvgtHR0dnQlq92B81Wq30km110M4uaWVUQV6901K6ikB4tilRYU8+v+sM1O64WDNeekS25WXmV ZlhV0ay4KmpdsUHS7/X6w0mAfKH0uILn+KXjNdLP/XrAV+gfv4vh2qEUtjVTr5YezaarvchWqDUC ar/R34MGaRrAPXzwxP3N6J0X3Y7eadEMvu6rPUftOPp7i3bRUaDXVpkK8ycnZ25LTP3NRjviqE5f 0843pfGhPzpiX6d0ahvCVMK78cG91+vF+u6/LQ1m+e8IAIAbT7u3RLOX6tdW37ZmtaO+aC0EVcjS LKpaADRLrtl0zZZGO5IoiL04Q66Wmag3XEFd13ar5/f7e252XEEvquszulEIVPUI5T85Ly5AjlqL 9Hvt93eHjx488TVQUz+4BmdRm8zU7VgwNTUT3pmacQM9rUnQDLz+vjQg1Ls1apPSYza0uxCvmXkt yt3Y2AptsHd/cxr4aYCpfe5P7IBT21tGW4W+qiCvd3YU1FfsQDU67MftGX6D+9ttWG/2un3fVqBq tzq+Hht/GAAA3DTHx/ebmk3XQku3UHO94/YmV0jSzLkCkkoBXS0vmgW1QSpUe4SbebelNgkF9XFY d20r12diXSm42WJ2HGpTenHgFlW0m5AGeQryUauMZu2j3XQU2DWQjBYcqx1Lf7Oakf/0k392f6ca WKpNR4NMLXTWIEFhXoMGLYiNev01Q/8y9qNfW+sMFwvlcHJKZzwZJuKpG9vf3m63mxvNjcutzb7Z aHXcz1M/L/vaffsx/hsFAOCmUWBRaFcYV/DRbKZCumY3VbqtfmPNtGshohYk6n/svc64dWU8O369 COb4W6lf/Po7MFHp3aD6UsOP3gnS+gaVWmfUZqO/WbXdaBtLDTrVqqXgrr/vk+MHLthr9t4G/1CD AbVmaYb+cHTqf/LRs+HTp5/lVF98+sWP+htu29e7vtb2i3ZQsViouP529fvf1KP11RKjmfYotHvp jPtvPD4z7/ad1wB7/FQAAHBTqDVGrQqatVTIUfBRANL/wG2F8VjC9ShXK8uBdh5RYKd1BW+SQr3a Umq1xrVZ+qOh+tzVV691GNfXYKiHXrPvuirAa0GstrH8p08/d/30CvL6m19ttDSb77b41I42nz/7 yu1o89csfNXrWV1uBk3735H62xXc707Fb2xwVz97u9Wxr7dlKqWqWUh5rgXOLSq2/73rZzt+KgAA uCk04762tvG1Zh81g6mg7tplWl2/0+kNo95k7chSrTYI7LixtE2kFqOq9UVhXotktZ5CIV4tMtdb bbRgerxrjZuR120dMPUvX/3JnSqrQ6r29+65g6XOzs79i4uPJttSfldbjQbA+voK7grtczYAFwtl v1is3sj/ZrTYe321FdaqdZNZyJpiftEdKKafS72+5jf4bx0AgJtJM+i0u+DnKDoMTKVwfXR0Mlxf 77iDqyY1DvPjWXe3g41axhTotUuS1nZoNl7712sAcHR46uvrqD8+Wuh6cnQ2XF1eD1dXmubunbiZ noqHhUL1Rva3q399fa3ll4plU8gVXXBPJlLm7vSsKeQXL2u1dRanAgAA4M1TP7reRYr65vXOUqPR 8m1wDabvxEMF2OhAqYsPnpovPv+Dm4FXu422pNSibS121a5Le4ORbwcEn9u67Nrgr51ktA3k7Xen A20POf6WN0q9Wh/Wluputl297fNzyXFwjxPaAQAAcLNF+9Fr8ev1EJ9KZtwsvMK6DohSb7z64rWL jbak1C4s6WT2L1rArUWp2k0mHkvY4H4n1M5K4y9/I2imvV5fGdZrK5f1Je01n3OhPZ1csME9GRay BU54BQAAwE+HFr8qxJ+dPRmqv10tMjbAP7fgVeFdrTTaqWa4e2B0WmrePh6dmHr7vWkz2r93qYGA DjMbf+k3plZbaS5V6/5GuxN22l1TXtQgI+Nm2hXevbTnJxIJ2uMAAADw0+T2m+8O3H7vaqvZ2x0N t7f3fG31eOudqVC7sBRyJVMqameWrFuUOjsz70onqC6V65p59xXgtWhWX2/8pV8bhfZatX65vto0 y7UVtxBVs+2p+fS4TeZm7zcPAAAA/JcMxodH6fTf7f7e5a1375hKqeb62xXcNduuWfjR/pGxod2U FpdMbHrW7Rvf7w3c4WSvOsBrn3a9a6DdY5rr7Uv1s6s9Rls/5rMF1x6j0B6PzZr52Xlm2wEAAPDz pvAejyVC7d2u4D5zd04h3WQW8kaLVbc2d9wONSptPalFr8VCOXQBvr/70heCKrCvrLTswKDvt9Za Qa1aC1fqDTfTXi0vudCuinrb52eTYTyeYLYdAAAAP28K7ol40gV3tyj1vWldw/7mTqAFrpppj9kw n05ljXrjK+W622IynyvZWrzctZ8/GPzts+8K7Fp4Wi3XbWBvhza4m9Z624V0hXb1tGeSnlnMXm3/ ODszZ6Zu3bHXhO95HrPteKm63cFvxjcBAADePG0rub7W9utLDdfTrtCe8fKX2l4y2jtebTE2vPtR gFcpvGvP+GLBhul0LlTYLuYqP3r2/Xo7TKlY1SLasFpZNjbAm1Kp4nrZtU+7TkVVWC/lFk02lZm0 yUzdmmK2HS/d4d5xs1Ks/0nX8UMAAABvVmutM2ytbYSlXNnceXfabQFZypa+FYQ9rxhTgFd7zDtv 3w7nZlMmmymawc6+Dddl11ZTLdUvc17uB4NOFNSjsK52mM3NfjA+HMosLzdMPl80hcKiu5aKi3ZA EbdB3X4/L/OX1HxSVxfk5+IJO2jIBJ6Xv5F7zeOnSQeSaTH22krbrC23fO3QNP4QAADAm6GA0lrv +M21DZNJZo03n7HXzA8eulQtVmNqjanYkG4DvOuJV4tNtVx34V2z9d8V3qvVRqxarbs2mLW1VqCw bq9hbalhP6fgZvC1ADaXK5hsNu8qPhMPZ2PxoFQqB14642c978+L2cUwn81N9m/PeFmCO14K/feg k4lPjx88HO3dCyuLdVMu1gMddDZ+CgAAwJuhkNJcbQc2vJv5maSZmYqbUq7sF73ifzrDqEWpg+09 /87UTKi+eIV3Bfd0MmMK+dKlvT/M2wGAqlSoDsvFqt9YXndtMOqTX19vGfWwF4slV5pdT6UWTDKZ DlOpdJDLFf1SqToslezn2xp/27eKhUKQy2TdjPutd2+b2fgcwR1vHdrQ/dnTL3NRadtSvatzPBp9 b41sDfqDnP47ODk6G54enfknxw8Ce9X2p2Z1pUlwBwAAN4PCSiaZDU+PH7jQbus722R+yO723kP1 uKs/Xi0zCvBuT/jFpdBLZYNKuR4UsovqgTfLtVXTsGFIs+yaUV9YyJhMJmfee++2effd26HnFfxq qW7Dei1XLH578JD3vFw2kwkKubzrd3/vnVsmMZskuP/MuJlvG7xVCuCuBqPcmQ3YL5bOJjganQyP Rqf+s6dfBCotqt7u9oPNbm9SRwejSY32DoKd7W1Xg97OVW3tuv8O1hottwWq/bs27WaX4A4AAN48 7eOuNpn15ab54NGFmX7vrpl6Zzqo1Wo/GFIa1UZs0NdM5SjXqDVyCu6pZCacnpqZzLprO8ny4pIL 8ArzXjrn7uuAJwV1zazrqrCeTmcC9bmr3/27wvp1UXBfLFwtVr1ze9pM3Z4Opt+bJlj9jT48/zD2 5Wd/zL1YFxdPn6vHjy/c7/6qBpPSmQADG64nQduWZrJfrOsfvx7AH589dtdHJ0+GJzaE9zvbgerw 4MTVcHsU7A1HwWB7z1W32Q1Wa42gVqrrfthe3zTddt8cHhybrc2+6axvmF53y1077Q1jA7sN5Adm q9O1oXzHbKw3TcuWDez24133PB3upbYxnWewUl9zA816tUFwBwAAL5d6yGs2SEel++MPfaeT0Ymb bd/Z3DXD/p5bmGorrFfrDxXeo1I4j6qQLQwLuaJvr8FyvRHUa8tBMbcYqj1GgT0177mTV1V6TP3v uUzRBXjd1paTc7OpQGG9sbzur6ysDRuNZk4LX8cv6wd5NrinEqkgs+C5/va3f/eOuTt19ycX3E9P 1dbxWS6qKLzqdFuVC7UKsi+UQrMLufYale5HoVjh96n9erpGdXb8Tak15PFjfZ2orr7GxZOPhhdP Pva//Oc/BFHZ+8GDs8euLj54Gjx5fBGMDo4nwXlnexgcDA+DbrsXbPeH7v5w5yDobe7Yv4tVVwN7 f7O7HbRbm4EO7tLz9Dm6qlprnaBRX3PXkX18aL9Ge70Taqa719kxm52+Ge6MzP7w0Nw7OHULofub A3P/5OHk/tHovjsg7NknX7jraHBgdns7Zn9nz2x3+2Z3q2/2dnZNa3XNNBurZmWp5q7dVtuU8oXJ LkXNlXVjBwJuxl2DTO2yVFtqhDvbe1+32yxOBQAAL4ECuvY+t0HDr1WWXWAqFspBubTk2k6uh3mV WgsU2k8O719qVlGhXQtTZ6fn1N9uvFQmLGSKgQ3wk9LOLeOgPjkISVs0aqtGbcuohaK6XpW2asy4 A5xid+Kh9oHPZgqBDe++et0V1K/qx4chb97LudaYdMaofv/bt19rcD88PIxdnzG+Xi58Kyh/T0Wt H2cnZ8Oz0zP/2SefBWcnD1zt2dDasQFYpeCrUjjes0F2tdEKtA6h2+q6q2rT3n6xFJyj28P+IBgO Ru5zotru77i63j6ytzNwtbG2Hm52ejb4brswHJUCs9pGdvpDd1+z2cf37rvbekx1sHfP3dcpu7pu 2fCsPf7vHZ66GtjHj4/OzOHoxN2PPicqfU0F8fP7j83J6NQcDu8Z++82/c62C96brZ7ptTdNZ/1q VrxSqJp6uWZqpboL2t3mprvm0nl31cfyXsbUyhVX5ULRVBdLJptOmdm702YxlzWZVNI9ruct5gph JpUJStliUC5Wr6pU09V35xO84tOBAQDAL4QL7UuNr2u11dAGdqNaLNjAUl1xt8ePB1Ub6Jfrq640 w2krbCyvu3aA08P7LrSnZtOmmFk0uUzeLFVqpr60fLVry0J2clKp2lOi0Kz7uurjqmQiZVLzafs5 aXt7wVY6zGcXH0YLVP+aBa//GQV37SKjAYO+1907MTMbmw2mp//rwd29U1Gq5VxpcBNdx6VBhhY5 Xr070PJXV1tu5jkqzSp3u9uTWeRu2wZlW71u31Wr2Q7WVpuu2q2Ova6HCrOtZtfs2+CqvfBVu+PQ G4Vgzfwq1D48e+wCtFo4FHR1+8n5hQu7+rj6stWPrfr8s6/Ms08/N+cP3zeffPzM7A1G5uz0kQ3L u+OQfM/dVgvJk/P37efeN+8//sA+34bmo1P7vR6Zi/c/Nl9+/gfz8YefmiMbtPX933/8ofnwg6fu th5T+I5O1NX31Uy3HtPr0b9Ff3ub3W1jByBmo91ztWL/3nTqrv7u1lfb7qqZbV21OHppseYO1ip4 eVPOl2xAL9u/x6sZcd2319Beg3KhMim1yWRT+efKhvHnKpNKTWq5WguajVU7kGm56rRavq1htxkN Jq9KaywI7AAA4KVS6Mx4RV/7qatSSRuqF/Jua8VyqWYK+bK7Ltkgr8e0m4vCulpXFJoUutTPqxYX BXfNWiq4LxZKLpRHM+kKyboqoEePKTRPT8VCzXhrlj4K8VHbjGba8y950aiCeyFfDPQa9P10cqqC ezwe/8Hvo/7ti8cXuW6za8P4OKTbiran1DsUUWmgU9cAZ7npZrsV1FU2kIb6WXY7fRewtTuODe4u qCqkKoxrVvn+yZkLwGenD1xQ1u2jw2MbnEdGs9rqv94baDb7wD3n2aefmQf3H5rtLRtyWx03y3x6 aL/OvVPX7rGzuW22Nnpms9V1M8/HB0fm6Qcfm4vzD9zjemzYH0yun374iTnav2cOdvfdzLU+b6e3 ZfqdLXMwGJpH98/M+dkDc2//wIyGe2Z/137uRsf1fHeaLRuk7YCvWneld1X096BBnEp/F4uFxbBY KLkZfg1U1DaVSqZDPVd/F9ohyPOyJpFIqsK5uaRrl1m2A8aoJjPb47IBPagWa4EN7ZMq299FwT7e WesG252+3+/0bcDuut/h99X1ti79frUmQtWwv/Nmo2GfYwdh14oWGAAA8FrVaivNmbuJy5lYwuhQ JIX3hbQN16msC/E65TQ+M+8+pv3Soy0bFdw1Mz8XtwFLn2eDu/ZxT8zOT2bPFZCjoO7CeSoTpFNe kLeBKj2fdq04lWKt4aW9P1dKS3/RDL2+nmbd/+evfv3Sd3vR4tViruhHs/0aPKjn/bsGCFFYv3hy MWy3Ov5qY821/dQqV2UDe7BUrodLNoCrp1oLEd27FUsNN9BRMLch0+2Co4Oh1lbbbuCjj2kmWTPm NriaHTv4UZjX7eFw3w6GBqa7sWm/5oYrBXWFYS18VDDXx6N2I11Va411O4Cq2t9Jxc06a4ZZfdeZ pOfuLy1W3exzfiFnqsWK+5huq3LprPuYZqpVC4m0vebC9FzKtchkUumgurgYZtMLrmWkkLGDL3vb XkN9rL3WdNWwg5XoZ6Mwns3kJ6X7Cuv253fVPnJtUapqNDoa2kGg795xsCFdQb3X3XYLjqPDtqJq Nrrjaua06PPFKtnfpX6fCuJ9+3xVr90jYAMAgJ+HZNJrpuY934b0QPX2724FsenZ8O3f3zIJG6IV 4hWo796J28Crg4vSbo9qtSgoxOv+bDwZphJe4CUywdxsQrPok8p4Od9LeUPNeKvUSqCDmMbf/q3K Yu1SM/caACjk/+Ovfq3v4/+1i05/DC2Qjc/MhgrvGlzksoXwq6++em4Ly3/94782/8///r/mT3/8 V/PBkwsXmBWOS8Wy68vX7LFmlPUOga56TLfdrHHam2xTWS5X3baVOhRK+8zrvm7Pz9uBTcqG38Ki q+i2Pkez0kuVqqmWK/ZnoHcpPPs6kyaT9uzPN6l1As9VuVQJysWym3VWqd/aBvZvVT6ddTPQ+nil UH6uv12P63q0dxjYIG3D9e5kdlrBd8/e3x8M/IPBMFAd7u37e7v2OV37HFujgQ3fttz98Wy0m7W+ tkhZ9UMLnhWuFeK1u4yKsA0AAPA9ErFEzJvP22Bty1Nlhy48p/M2eBcCbWunXTLe/t17Rts2qmda C0gV6G+/eydcSCw8VCifj8/n5uejugrqnud9bwhTaNc2jwr/GgRMT921QTVz6X3H6akvg/rl1Z6j AYLeDZidTZgvv/zqUuH9iy++cK+z39v2tdBSYV2lnn09X8Fc4V2hX2Fds9y6HbXeuPKyOgTKhfOM ZqUz2SCTsT9DzT6rLSSVdpVIpFxF96PS8zU7bYO7m8Ue97pfzT6Pw7RKITfqoX+uv1q/u+jnPi7N QEd1/Wtcr2j2+/sC8+FgEIsCum6PHwYAAD8X2vnjxWARVbR478XZV9wcmvHW72h8962PLj7989u/ e/cvWuCo7e504qlmyf/73/2D/0Ozqd+lWKw0S+PQrrYbLUjVQGD69t1XFtpF4VW73Gi2XbPkd+/O 2OD+L+bf//3/mX/7t//4VM/pb24HUY+2Wn+iUK6APhdPmNl4ItSJq+qXV6n1J5Xy3O45CuMK3+Vy dXxyay2Xz0eDobz7e1dpUHO9oo+rt1qz1VGbh6rR+HE/WwAAgB9FoX2t0fpaC/Nq1cZkkV5U2qmk rFMxrxb1+QW31Z9mEBuTftXr+1K/WFHPa7QHtY4sH39rvALaJWNvMPIV2LVjiGbdb783bf7+7/4h rFdX/qrTUot2gOaCq/1dVyv1Sy3W1NdRYNcgQKF9ZmbulYV20e40NoS7PncF8Xh8zhweHtng/h+X 46e8pT58hXrtgqPFlYn4vAvqCuhe2vOr40AelQYD2iP++iy3/q3jLwcAAHCzaVa9kC/r4BS3I4kW 7c3Gk26RnrZ208I9VbRjiQ1xoQvy9nNUCvvRLhKtVseG/Iq7qprNVtBud4N+b+B2ptjZGQZHR2e+ rWEU5KPSaYzX73f7g8ne2Ken54Srv9LR0cnQDrBCbdunvbhnZ+bN3/+3X+lkyP90tl2npZZK9aEW htrftRZ2hqXFJbf4NeqZn7KhvVKsvdLQHkklUsPp6ZlQi2jVg57N5iZ97r1eL7ZUqX+t2XMttFTI r1frk/78l7EtJQAAwI2i4J7PloJ8ruS2FdROJYvFqikWKm53DT0W3VaA03aEekwBv9FYc+G+3e64 rfN2dgbmYP/IlXbf0AEt2kYvut1ubbo9ntutbqgTFivVZVc17XRhq9Ptu+pubgfD4SjY7O0E7U4v ODs7909OHg2PdcBNdNCN6lrQ1+z+L302/3DvuFnIVy71+1Jo1z7av/312xqEhb1O/ztn291sdL6U 0zspBRvYl2sNtx2idlupVJbGJ6R65s7tmAvtuVfYHvMi9d/H47OBvr9aX7JeNtTOJuMPv1WtVmPf LKhk5hwAAPzMRa0yCu+z8eS3ygb1QAsfX6xMpmA/PmsrHs7FZ83M3bgNVhkTi8XdjhzamUOBfmOj a5rNtgv5q6vrZmtr2+zuDs3R8ZnZ3tkzNqi76m3tmpPTh2a4d2hsYHeP6arHdV1eXg1tuZl97bt9 NcPfddXvDYNWsxuM9k/80ehkOOiPcirtenH92HjVaHD1+IstPVH9VMP/YDCIdVo9X1s/6hTM5krL 3L0VM7/5h9+aP37xv8I/fP6nh9e362utdVxQtyHd/iwbQXmx5k5L1WJOlRZ5apeU+J0ZG9hj4fxs 2n+VPe3fRbPmtnwthlVvvba49OYzr2QXGwAAgJ+E64tTS3nNwH5T0YmYk0V548WqUemkyYzn+VF7 jFpl7t6Nu9LuHLqvdhkFbC0MtBVqK75cvmQWS0umurRiSuWaWfDyplZfNZXqsntsda3tSgF+o7Nl +ttDc/bgsTm9/8gF+XuH983x0QPT3xqag/1jMzo4MZvdHTs4aIcK8VGPvg7YUTuPjpePjpuPTsDU EfTRyZiHo5NxnfpHNvx/V6i/uHj6rdJAIKqotUd1fv7q2nvOT89jj+33iGo0GuUO9u49LOZKoYK7 /TeaRGzenZS6tdFXcHfhvWv/7Tawj2sj1GJT7WmuLR61wFMLQTWzrX3TvWTKHbyUTnl+tVodeonv 33HmVbJ/L0MtMtVpr5lk1lbmpe8bDwAA8IuhkwmvH65yvaI9pPv9vittl7e7O/DV7642GRvag7SX f67KlboL3deDfq22bFZWVk21Wru6vbzuDsxR+01zveNu67AcHSmv/ny15qjUwnP+6APXsqP7OvnS BnZ3DL1OwtTj+hy1hujz7x2emtHeYahgr7CvQYCbzd8buVLwt98z6NiBSK+nlp4919ajQUBUDx6c B0dHp/7Z2aOha+s5PnalgH291Nf/zSz41c/pxV7/qPSzU0h/ZL+mLf+h/R4qvabB9jDQPufFfNmF cPW1p+cWXNBVMNex9TpyXjPW2tNdJ6hqMae2SVRg104s0WFM0SmpszMJX3upv6nAHtFOLsm5dJDP LrpZ92QiHWoLzPGHAQAA8CqprcOWDalXdX0GP5r5jwJtv787bKy1/HGIDyqV2qRqtfqkdeZ6qb0n m10M1ZevEzFV6smv11cmi2wV7hX41X+vI+032j0X6HVfYV+3FeJ1vL0CvQK+nqPTND/68FP3PAV+ fQ19rF5bnQwINDjQc7e2tkMNUMrlqh2IrLnXrHcf1tZarur1xnOlf8/qatNdtdVh1z5XpdNAm3oH wV779mvqe98/feTWG2jNgAYtCuzasjFqK9GMu05JVVhXaVcYLTBVz3ohV3L7miusqyUmmUi63Vim 78RcWI/H53NvOrBHtAVptVz39W+yVzcY0f2b8voAAABwzXP7zNeurtdn9XVfPe3RfXeiY293uNZo +S7E24q2tYxKWwYqsEYBVtsKahZap2+O9m2A39oxrfW2WV1Zcwf76ECf5lrLfazT7rqFuOrX1/H3 m5tbptXaMHt7B676/R3T6/XNw4fn5vj41Gxv77q+fj22vz+afI7ud7s90+lsurUAKt3XOwp6zunp mdEBQzpaX69HhwzpNWjvcr2ORw/OzWBn6GbK9Rr1b5mfSbhKxufdUfraSlHhfHZmzi0ynbp1x9ZU ePvWVJCcSwXlUnWybeIPHcD0JtlBx9CWe0dBM+92QBYuJLIPNRufIMADAAD89L14sFS0n3cU9jut 3rDd6vnNtY4L8lmdnJnOuOt2b9u1ypQK5W+VZr+3tweujz8Wi4dakBsdna8TOYvFkpvdL5UqbmcW XaNgrgW6avfR4+vrLbO83HAf1+esrTXdVYt7o9YgDRjm55JXBwrZ8B2bnnFBXAtINdBQaFdgVyiP x2aNN79g7rw7ZabemQqn3rkdpJLpQPud66qTVQu5kl/Ilib7m/8UDtXSa7Sv3de7BQrueldB4T2V 8IL5ufTXhHcAAIBfgLYN99ePlI968dWDHt3W4VJNG/SvPj4YV989plaebrfnaxGuSqdxep4WUGaC QqEUlEo27NtSi8z1itplVGqPiVplVFrUq0rMJl3NxmaDu9MxVzoBND4zG976/XtmdjpuKoWyyaYy JjWbdLPsb//69yafyV/azx9eHTh0VdEi4+JPdEcWL5Ud3pmaCbNewfXoq3VG1/lE2ie4AwAA4K+i 0zejnvzr/foKytGi0++rZlNtP1d1/d2B6HTaSdVqk51Uzu6d/nl2euYvn1w8Nf3OlpmZiplEbM6F 9nTKu8zlXu+2ja+DBhy5TNFXv75m3hXcFeRTCY+FqgAAALh5Viq1Zr1Uu6wWK+bs6L5ZSKRdaP/1 //hHk0llfpahPZKc85ozd2cvp6dmzMzdOTN9OxbEp+NsDQkAAICbpVKsNFeq9cuV6rJrkdFMu2pr YytMJ9J+v93/2Yb2iMK7l8752iLShvevY7EEbTIAAAC4OYq5optpr5drrqddO8YotFeL5bC30Xv4 U1hk+rLo5FTNtHOCKgAAAG6UWqXWLC1WLsuLFZNLZ117jHaPeec3b5tyoez/kkI7AAAAcCOpPWYx v+hCu7Z81PaP2hrynd/+zvW06+PjpwIAAAB43XQyaKFQGuYyhcvFQsmFdR0U9c5vfhuWi+Ugl874 hHYAAADgDUomvWbOK/rJZDrMZYo2tOsApqSJz8yH5cXyw1KplNMWlOOnAwAAAHjdtOBSu6Zor3J7 dYF9dmbe6OAhnR5KYAcAAABugCi4v/vuLZNKLZh02jOJhGbbE5dzc0laYwAAAICbwkvm3F7l77xz K1ClUmmf0A4AAADcQJ7nxbz5fM6VvT1+GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMBbb/1/BpWvIG7PuoAAAAAASUVORK5CYII=SUm8AQgAAAAJAAG8AQAQAAAAegAAAAK8BAABAAAAAAAAAAS8BAABAAAAAAAAAIC8BAABAAAA7gIA AIG8BAABAAAAwgAAAIK8CwABAAAAAABcQ4O8CwABAAAAAABcQ8C8BAABAAAAigAAAMG8BAABAAAA CkAAAAAAAAAkw91vA07+S7GFPXd2jckMV01QSE9UTwARxMBxAu0AwQAgABAQcADCA2NsIEhIwwVF QAABAAAAvAUp/w1RDjgUSyz8L3EwZzTd/wAEQoAAAQAAAQGlgPCUAAAIGABAACUAQAuFGdtrm2Q1 S6ZJT/Sm077tfbTFba15GtL+0jqe+qE5l2reX3sVe9SW9zJe8R+LtNpYA41zuWNx+SxWJ5LXjfYm Ux8a5DaotIV4672/fJmxyRghKaz48IiPjTRivk/zZe67J/TD7rGEWmnOppJyn6b8y8xdzzYIBcyM UgkFnTr/su19zNd2IK75zJF5K6slZox6TZkg7SYj3EU/U5fon//urlRW6xG0v9SgAAABAgQgFABj GIYCAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABZBGgABgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFAVAAQAAAAAAAAAAMCwAAAAAJmj bNl9ypG5GyE4w2EgrRg+S15ulBtxWiAhMihpvF1zMmibf4RRpXEJv1jq7gAhYiXcG4MRp2zsNh98 87M0JQwaAFRM8UoGRpQcf7fCvBEZzI+ayd+7MxKnFow9vMZT9o/6ysLhTuBXitCP6T/rPb+2Ciii aGHjkwwCvNYsa8cjfE4oLqU257hN5l78RHo8tv6zHfajZgN66Ac/Ld2HpzNspxFzedgR+3YL+s1u qwpiRn22EYjzvyfecpqMWps3Ax26nkowoiy+Tg+2ioRGLxIVxZmGs88UcqXUxJmuYGYjKkgZ1Lf7 WZ2/zmSZzwULJc2QtK2UE3Iftk2JjeD/Dp+7sH8J/J5YiCVhlDDUhtp0+9CpdzAzOjneUUaOFHSx aKOGVeEM1jKzyxx2a7FSiwJRacDAwzlfsCaNHLOzoU7ztZRKe2ynU4DhUPRYMnBDJSzbDgQSNBAa JAxYjOqOE44KjElj0u6jM1IJzN5BZhJ6DIycjjPeRzIlMEYCWAUQvNMm5WkABLhhAMGwJQ+aFYb6 fZm+nqtyA2XPLWaLKNOWIcWK0e1nlzKj7wjAcQIOJGFEIMEJGFEIMIIQQcfgLD/gi0w8QIBBBCBC UQIEKNnkBVCWT1oFUwQKNCuqWJx3skU8NQJmLH6xYxNq8Z7St82MndGxtlCnyf5sE6mULVjiUqo0 mB0bgogQFcsN80WLEIClqMCN8grBsxQsnbpPoDsvW3lAIVUGzB3iNh3MBlJZcrFAfu0ja0JkbTCM vNZG3nIQ0mBgALPPeNUCMYM5SLJ9thOBIagjyBYCIoFoFA9BBKJBoB0AgTxcyVQhMyuiz94SnJJt MYDBNcYcFGCUJQMJUej+zrktVNMb0KywQ8UglBGhMHEYymWcWqR2mqP/NFcnaFE+Y9tlqUFUVcYJ d9b5T8Imwh9YQSFggMX0TJFiX7CJX9AUM4RkaeN94owqLojJz6dKJKUPuUnvbHBlQSpQYfcxbKXB 6iV8xhVDSe06HLQmiztqXktlUbMMlaaIWZAiJGBVaXD9LZuZ42WS1MTF9CSB99jXzQZrg2we3kJ0 WWfnBDwqMBkUHrOAYRP2m4E8ftvKO/Cj/SZdiRFzvgHK0Zfsoci9OX5ORI59slkSb3GyLi0LF5rw RoLRC0uBwzgmDRI+nbzFfCvD1dQiMiE1KbNuGkGWsH/dydNvt4grotPkm2pkWlpMQRb4MBrouxn1 kvxTkoqxR95RII/q994n9nL+k085X2ettZF9nMbJPlOe+sIMX+SBcwYiYhf7PCbnZGbzYtwGV3yi JHYopcvosW57Enyn0WSfQxR6SUFzdTegPNQYsxOcUFo5wGN27/8NZOieWU/K30c7drBiENIeA1CZ aACQ0Qs3AUmbgIkMkFGDKgSDI3PoZksSMkaQJhxBmEpBI/MzIJGi4mAAAAEDK5EFi6kkIogNSgBR RIUKg5AQUsQpU2KLKhCBwkqjXlSuFiCFCiDEKNQpBErEIiuRMQQUgTUAlKFikoOllUUnsQiKkBQx CIAJ4krS2MUQhClYURJYojbLDWSWWlaKTUnqO4dIPcQNgaCEEEDoNqgKgKSTF7EIQNnWIUOACJK3 O3k0xsQWFFQQgCoyKNwlZhichUwQMqqFOkMTAR32DtukWnwXy8TSPBQUcZ0M8+V41QhzI+ViwScQ jmD46UWUFicNrUfN2KOsT/6eNchJ/ivcLiNLTgidlXNrLimzgvBA5C+C4IJK1LK2w+DxHKz7BE1F 11L4ArkXg8HARaswqNvRN7Kvy1j7M46d1N+xOvcs4Gs4qsGsNQqoNZncrr3i/kRq312GRZYqkU9I SDPEwW8iZ4oaVhZI3yI+GEqUqFz7kmSEjd094KLRy9Auw5Mo+UOSOD6r1vyxU3eJpawUs5sCy6r1 RXcWFShpIpgquwc+F6BH3l8kzGTvJPHK+H1I1M0SRgCRQ5em2a5urKtWkJUzo6xVMFJX+kY8rMyz KsrXIRkRiIjMi7Hl8fwz5EWHuqE2vF1rNY1Az3ufZYYFcdBN4bUfnuIyCpMjh1BMRMUUQQ+QYLHm rYO299NwUo9tkyxK6FQOkTDBlE+AvyLuvpNBknPxUsag0lJChAw0sKESILXgJA3QGDdg3VXEdbK+ 342gM+zQeM0GwCDTM8X0JkAj3SNEQaYropC+UJxK6m35WDYqfK97S+s1CcvPIFLuNjdBbM7KXSI/ KtcWiFORrq0S4XYMax5xnj4Oh1OZ5d/FuCxhmEmUIQXsKMgk8JXw+A2EGwi5DCjwlGqCNowsbCsL RZeHFy72TUNCAldggojaGHcZSaOYhIRBAgQaYISDwVix+ahBSChIaFTJBRZmGOEIYciKVPbctor9 snoNdZOTDMMMgqiNBVlE53R1FGSFd2sQZBI4mFdFYw9BpKaXHEFxooxocBchAgEKGEMNEx2LoRzv pwM66yZ4qGaojYxggYwIkcI2kHS0RG2fiCA0aYIBDuLZGcOEYQQKEhmiqonRzI1XReDjGmEpcdG2 kczbLRwkXEwbwDtBZOirkleyJJUt2yvcsEGNQxh4VBlSUMg5IVXCAEHhBApKpv9dGwWp5kLIu1mS +TpMjIxZq5q+REQdFrvoDvU8YuiiYw8JxMYVKN8yIzKpBp+y1/ZYhwv1qTPe6gcmpcNQmby1c4S1 BWVDqBIyPUkypz0iAp02rSV01aysuWrTK9HopbQkA3TmNESRl/1oMsEYQoaFHJSPq5ne6xrJyily WSJ+TM1IGtggNElKtlO4+Q3g01FZlMyFmOeD1pZ/DR4SHNcDeyBAYjiNBueDTQ82jOGQUmuWg4w0 p5Fk3oCh4ZhgI1IJCQpnVgU9Zn5mblV5+PxQVUVYMU4yto3Uk9MpcXcQgGMWNJ5yebvs+6Jdyu6C Sk6T0rmM4QIALMPiVWdGkmzPLWO1+p7oSxdRxAXCDwjIAiwkoFCzDDhRYmwQarBNcyMp0x4wkWFx MNIMxlGiN5c4J3vRHNU2Gh3YLJd4P9F/vbERHHH9XxxrYK6KDijG59TkesOkdVHQiewI51hJOiAN sCs2GvPit3i7jZRWdkwQoqZCBQq3qGw9L5GZxVxLNRDGdEuJI+JIjhAe0TokNBIGIEiI/0jZ7UiI Cn7y6KBSKuEvsCCieOAl5IM1WN4ZS8I4zhI2cRcfM6qqaIszMuCyfNpilcTQh0IRya8IoDVLccko MLwMWAYfF6CAsJ8sCU05y+ElRu/Aj/MEboHs4f3tUddylQCHsG6mBbi39UZKjZySv7ogaLk7/r5z 2Y+sc522jFUBzrsSI1EnbrCRU6Oi9DqlQ/JsRH3QWuZn0HOGVxNVZfaxLgiNIdImvQciLeVUeRJQ lBkgBkjwt4ky4H0W6ecBQsB5kgD52gVkDMXizFTAaVx6LoFQ4skMKweWAUEUkk/liwe8KIZYLTiw Ks52QYqxF+EcqEacrUsu5RVHOur1kyqkRHkfEYpL0rirl20TbTx5Gq4QfAKTGkSSoKVVCJwhOMnk Z6ko4QgwqGrQVNh1NyZ3S1NCZEiXWKaFbmbJiWhS1IDbkZ1zI+CFReKmxOezouI7x97KcoWI0njB E7yhB8u+hCLhGT6kajmZlnqxBOSIGgoYgbilm+GrKMrksGKLaEbiFLiKtklHarAPF/WIhc9QTyVF yZR8Kk6dtkpBvDHBKBmcz97O2vhLOSsSWL4IPPd0KmZKvDyAnEPiwnat8+Ha/F1ric/8T3oKX+dO BTKlIbxLInV8zNACPFyJZjGZGVNfBEZCjyygWaTOmVgGoKAcxQZY3Pk4i9diTLrqF/wm73iwlB1A QUF8MvveTG4InaB7+cef5IAhQgxQlFhG+G9A2NUpxFygmL/w88PUevcVvYjkjWCNJRKPaUHyQYrY ERMRmZGWwrBLVLwYHlbB/LB495nywgJhny8K/VNOaeJwqP+09rnT+2piNrR5Es/eNU6RU4S2mcqR V0+8GBINlEIjww/eRNPGMjOCB2rcVwIJX/2gdSYM8zrEXM8FCh5eeOo0DX00kL92bEEQlLl9FyoS kdCyI14FO4KsJmfdKdI/9qm2H8fY55+nIQExB44GYkQUBM+CfEiqMy2IPiOmdT4s5imKFIDornyy G9p+JlC/9sRL9hOI+faLJ7z8NAiOuasFHoBeVCotOTLNfSLiVsPcZEEWdcECJWIuGUGmWtUneZQC 6RgIjAXPQCc0RktpjAQXDssET8AAAAEJqwDwlAwABBAAIAARACgCwdmyOm2ifcPJxOTyefornwCF VqKKmldJ7Xm9tEgYr5fZ9pLiVfaUq5vjBDD0rYpbqEpYk7yDhVcYZ8TENi0g6OV5xi6YAFWATyZ5 rV5bS0QY3iBQWSbbRbRarlj9bberb7GlPX+CZgkG432kTImjnzp3U6RUga0IKXF+Rp1uKp+OpnDR BI8IMIViPqrYJMiJ3ohMSYQ2oBJouEoGcDSREYi1Gq977ksSRS19U3pxTTTFGmqbZpTqtWtYsp8l pTS2JWzOLuqJzN6ntkdr1WMrLiE+RQAAAAEKAxkAAEcYAMBFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAERqaKDIy BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABaxMT6QAAAAAAAAAAEOJa97OwAAAAI7tZHgcIQ/1IQO7+/BsjJiYS7YNrDvF Y0IpKiKAjlJenf3HdJak/R9BtzKKktDAvFqUhiO1sZs/vaNn35U9TVkxE6rQBUShusGeU6bN2U0G fjYJ0ST6XnxHAe4BvqJx7RaW+NGjTUkze3FYfTBtBqYEbitrf/gZDXFQkWydhKd+5sRPnZBttSJU kPKn2oguiOOOhLGfLm4unAXgbd7qh1Zc84mrINu4h6NO7BajRZkRfoouTObRlb9FTAJcULCFljRU QpNlLIoCleZnKddcgQTISsaY2yC0fbS1Knai8oeRK85rLmpIxyWHEYeLk/1seQosrsL12GlaR5ft 8ccuYMRaaRes9nylWVpm3mzmwrRtZ+goTlG/RlBxaJG0T2kg3+/QBS0bfvYidFF0+Q4LzYQVVmdb AwRHY8LnftCkz0dHBKt0IZ9DQoIqI6UQ5tQMUQDItO/772AOa0xcHO/IYUZp49zwNYITM54B2oAY I8esElSONSob3SJeMCM4BmACDAh/qRCbYBwQagqBgQOUJS0eMA0El3Hn0bDSEhMWaOWpoBxUgrWy Mq6A9AdF5BJormXoW55OOHoCBJB0IdAknQBAgGAhc0EiYCDeCE4Q8roRMoCWQNRkyoYS71FBZ5/y hKd4+R4dnng8s5InPbykeQboeETVhD4hggGSOTF2zUzwhUmBaIomczxF4ryRII0FwEOpkCE1R6eQ t4peiMOAqcmDdWstajtPFaLFCDrMem9cQR0TVq+h5B+KCkgIYhiIMQDGO4hCddTJji+UPpcYnRo0 omN3l0tu0mAkXowgIHEnJwpK0TpyEGUAEACAEWQYhmGMYDEIC0zCI1rHCFTB0zARykKFAAQAOREC AgUwQ3+EEgBHdNlgaN+nCAfgOaI0ZZAXH4MAQGMaJk0CCm6GSIR/bEmYHD5PVjYQCPFgD/5LOpvg gsETQRBhBobCI8SArFikCB/OFDblpNpO5ggUOZaVCkH0I3XyCqyr7cj+L+qItYEsqayaQ3Q/kNHv UfuX89rNuNFb8Ez+NPrSdyIRDe3VQTf6CBFlhzKabLUYVCErfrLGx/QNh8kcgUYAQYBYtKAFCRkE VxwgBhAFDhRkNKAbM9RngYaSAMRltsQqzIBAsAAAABFUiSxxjguoaAjVJfH0vgufL4BhyIImIoAB WDcbOZwYDrQNXJkIsgjnH+P5sc4gDG5EARB8Kj2YxCl4fO/2ETqZogWC7SJehs5ewoWzJDMyxpiZ ZR1K/gK+VF8iOEiZyTs0SQFVEWpoSdjoWacikE5Kr33usRA1pehFhF8UpgmkB8ABYFAAAAABUGJw YhdabktVQzmU4/syxdCeX4HtQkhyDtT58K4Vy1IUBjGQQAA/OQDQjRVUzQIhtqpN1NolZR2CCCCt EdEggX7SCKki+DkWQucd59kvFHqD3mK5SW48wAh0NbbiGvUHpwgWEGx4aHhoIDD2gGAwcXxsVErY 8eINxB+gMV97rF70EyIPhm7fMLGwdSJGCIekCBxhXM0cuZMIa2x3SqSxAO707xJM8mAXDP47+Qpt WV0vQu0wDOarKaagSCoy14KIQcoOaUnYsU6vs05eiVQqctwws89i5kDKSUGCWAFDNAn91rwSjBZD 7xBR054rrY/7oLIZmX+YQNL2Sgmrc2QyrOJEo22h5PAQ/cpvztCWeZtDsxp6VZ2hbWLCKPeYWQdA 187lmRYEc/AejWmxz1i/lrwvvqmZLS+wwRsCky2MgYhPy23jydLioUHsEIZIuYA81gw7m0zLKRRJ 9/KUKStSQFkTUFTz21i0j787OZiTloMKwuKj8IJb0vLIgJwHXFDU5ngPfsVafYTZNd1YpU86VxSO 2Sr9QTnxltFdTqY8tYZ8rAT/9ZAIQWWSDVtnMZTlqB65+MoJ5hPRm8ucCK+TyESZiQEMkzwEOno5 DZjItMhIpozNRkbFMBpIpDmSxDI2IESbUZG4QmzRCG6SgLEiIlAAAAABCwXogvvPW/jQpAkSp6cs mKf7icgfcJqZUtcFY3CGFo3B9t86n89bpWX6nDuqCx2RENuf/dHIruuf7g0Zic3gLBWlb+zlxMX4 Kc7iwlUJ7N1kFvzKO8OVwefJqRfpZRctxs9YeHNoYQokjBfrgQ3SjYiZACFs5lH7csMlAE00U4B7 XLeKTESS3NZgoohubgIxso0gwIIgpP1EKWIudyoCo80GrRsk9GLssolOlwNEOWYgJuLBDEyDlvLG zlOXuS5tCetapp2wavcSkHq1NxpiqASHStJ5z1N4n2ME9/lN7gasQQrxLNvJEEFEMm3inFGIAjjU +bFh6z+fLWKfqnvcW9UeTk1D7OUifd1wJ9hM+fklBMm+5Zqep0uo7JZjWmb/MznC3HHecwBMWuOd QpyyKdJLqg0URNrOaKAoHXmoeFMA0exJRDKFfy3Vu01TVQXYo8vdojKcJuQY3AOpgtrT92X7k7cm 9E9YiAdxQn3d9rO7j6t/8U8zM3gRgz/S8qJmLYxGIU0bk80ucKRlE3hVv9t1FWsSmi6QW/a7SsR3 fnU9G8KfN7cJHeWm5iFJk2flgAiCuiHIpFFMFRRBUqEWSAKa2gZ/NkJ2oO96mSzlJ/FbIpgikgpM CyHUpgkmJLzLl0ECXkiqoN4V7mHTuPIRrxSg0lJRXhIzTwQkOBU10/h1YmFIeg43KTxHFpctN8Kp Nc6K/3Y3KNxJirCwrIm8pNwzqJBywZQMEOkzdmEBTayCpNjsOaoUmKZX2sRjQjFjmyNXciZQOpAq TuQ8zAwcAjkfCSAzSZO1rRcm9p3nJVREHSZnSaRnhzFUC4r4gwpHwRcyOisVZ13FNIBEs3GSDQDQ oGpuHDuFJC7WoIMyWTprRub0yg6LhI0cNUOgwDN2KKYU9IEEmkXJtQW8GwPrk0yMgkUzwrTQCQpI WCAZq1DUZSTKUy5IzNYO7KXkZNSSmb1qipGTjaoqZy6yYxfM0FtyYvBAoSRaXUZRhGSazV6Tdb7i gw6oBGTEWQnWAj3BwjoDgku7E8tBwlEjpxXDIuDDWFHwFzBgjjKUQ8g2CeZLh1bhmiTh1+XGYXYr g6bKHi2kyQRInLekgEtwzR1UE46TUn40tKuiZXQlzTKOxG+pYUlcuQlyB7JkgF1yVgxNbaZETQqE olmFRoAooWENdFTta0mGiNlBuyS5FMHNEhFKDxGPIOZmRkZQSbMuk1Mj3uEyJwVmFrszwXIVdZcm RkfmzT8SEssHoCRQfARsivBSdO7KIsLwhNDtMVLXR6k5nhLhXXpVhpE/iMJuzI9DopPzo6VJ35hi GIZ5m8bO4mCKCEy+aS4I+UiWBoI3yarCpmv2ZrmenSKDMGcqb9lmeYMBqnnwAy/fe7xe4ybwKCHu PgUI/hU4cSCus2uuyL5IuuhGAp4VIgpe4+SRlpt3dsEIqXbMSt5r5QIE9/OsM+ddfk77guA5EK4u LFuH/sNUXClnP09LvZ8rJnZS9sY/MVMdhX2SwmDN193LxtNIkuw8FFU/K+5Vh+IYRuIhwh61wnXQ WZYuTHY4gy5UCRM3FyginunFr6HxqyXGBF2c0ky7IQYrAQrUIG9VZmC3aHhVgmB8be++CiwjMrXx GOVSSptgZReEfQwvPFzPG5Iq8eLFTHg/L1SVrfdKgjVt3koJkUE18TG5ah8lBEk3fcu9eDve6HXk ucEaCEJmfdodevAD7lQak3GwtUgxYFMqT5WlL0l4HBbvBSW3b/SAhZEgUJ7VZcOj5JILJbWOYuIg Qqt4XANrCZbs0pWrRQnEL1w79uzEmTWnyzFQkktma5Jy4EWGWLr4zCWcaC3s1YUbWbduEO23s1BZ j0f4gv8+Je+phYYXZOOPGmvDpjBMR/EpiwWbS7yzisvVh6odlcxCkCgTuVJe1bKWpV13qTAcuKeS yWurm4n3NE+fg9PXJnVQesEEY5O5Ml4ddCoOzKNueSyqwac/OzD2I8JTByoNawz7AbDsDBgm6WBk AounZXEywYRkZ4UiczwLaEsZiBCKsW4bgxPwbA/VAsmXIcPCzmw3eDlmwlIijX+WIOeWE4TgYbcy NzqmbvJkmHASmcZCIwzZ/Bz6HT8GBkygyFYFByNqAw5vJUXInzP2BJldiGeE8/oulgVkPsiRm7aZ tJ3ZbPqZC1I0MaHJgShB+ZcaOuTIqWgfYaMtkJgLSJBCJ2EuwHQZPBIMIy4MFsK78s0hU5A/klix V4aLWHW7WTPhCdEDYMPhdLpeCt6CfMm0h9SRSe08/61DNjOagPwxTMtfNEhEkSGrcREhOH8oieAH 96ZNIIqNFHBAqEotjWxPBTOpXK3qw+KrtWeUmaOu0epQUdZ1VIWS0LY1t1tetbUM4QI89ziGRhn/ JvZxdMsKwoMCdMkHbyiIORmj0EDLOFpBpmVTxBYRzl+Ocqg6kV9Wi32BCMQYdpGcOuJhIapTgggg vkEAEYUzddH8gqhRaqj8yMOZSDPzCFIKMsxCSoYhhQjIyD/7BhCymBw5BTTFNgRNOLFcOZEgc5pF M7LOTMtvmrMwIKMApCxJEbrtpSJzMouQgQQSMEDpYckRzLCQ6iUzOsqlO4QQtGQ4sHnZiGKOKKMo L4Uz/2jFghIOKSVp4+UYQjGcmMSICCCgk0z7BMMMQcjiyXcUijMiUjmHGITMajFkPkoYkOHCjZhQ phdqWbmpGVGRmKIOIMoJFEjK6HRYKIEBGRBIZhmRjw5w0K7qSbCUhw0fOBxensUorqWcwGQBEASD IxZhp+y5iMYQYsFFELaWVYEDQgGbmTHEEIMDh5BEoskYWEEDTMIUMZJhSn5VswR3JOGn5iLCnAhA ggyEOJF6e5CEGikcMhQ4aCuw5hQ7kYFPHSZWFiWaJoIqSKSTHhm5Ua6300Zkj0g3TaQsxaTQODWm 5NMeauSGEK9EyMqi+ZZQmDktZBU/KpkzwXVMnNvgYTJGmsjPwQiVcMObZph7lajs4SxDMQkGIZQi CEM1owEMQYSCCCEoxMifsiYQIaosO4cMUMuR0SYINCMQIBE3DFDPjVTe4F2Zmk8MygwPTNMmIidE ST0TTbWBJD77LXKJdesyNxJJlrQKjNz6UE6URvwVpMBYV5pqVuIjpvz4yFjo/aoNhQSKRliTEvSi Mo7Om4R0uTlVvUt5VTQAVCEyp0nHKdbcl0Zs9MZo9gT0WqOq0VBwqM1PmBqGZKOMN+tRo/hLsB2E cRKXQjmRrNKqFaeCyVnYREEcm2QUBMgt6kRucwCIxAQjEMQkwoZGFD62bNUxslNzRAUMECIIADMg iDhDEQZ8cwZJRfCFkGKYcwpCKs0WQTpizKiePZpXRsHLJVIhyEKMEIGVEBXxsNDLhfBBSu2jjwce TSjEmKHELJelUCCKoJ4avinRc3mVdl2LwdfFK4D5SB4Prw58s3y6x2/fvNVe8qXcNPf/iAuKbtlX ep4IZs8IwiC4LKxi89JvBeO+5+Spxt6ut8fe8HBEoikWKhSoU2z4+VrhDsvVU7WMuipxqeMxkiS9 Sv0zjo/uCY8INUcvSH+6ELiXrhDKCVTCRlRmKeJo1AgMlAgKMoxf2nOmC7NrZhnafRRDS8sLMTGC B+OIW+N73W3V+kUUn39Q+EurxT3FlKCge4713oAmZggEUQw48g6wxghKQFHEdE2WrrWOsad5sECx mNIbBjjODnxYSAb1FqK+yrj08LBb61hprdHPemajM2PbPgfv8SFmilKLCcIsEEhKunlNd/+pR7Rh Y3ohGDZLhBoeTgOV0qSqjX8sJBJ6UwQeIOKYpvRzX3zw6lUZOPBKypFo7YDR5qSzvrACXxYSgrKD RtKmi0kIrwNeXAw3k6NO12xue0JDVrFzsEndkoXvbgT8RsAglJaA0QjaKPpMLR6uhBWZxCD0WcIY ZLkgufXPRKSEgBxvUTq4KDp0xOHxuENp4RaMKMLd8YIDAhUqZ2g99R7yW7wLZsKamGoKe6iungzv e5YS1WQIGjGGjRZPKu2/6X9aVgQdmxoyEMKMxnJGcOVSDcRDIhMuowJJMRi7iyJ3dwGzCxvRiwyA wS4KYt98VX7Or6a+T0aWdATEQ0YlpC/m7FlfaOjZmbYS1IRaaRE7EEEERqsa7QZ2Fx41JG+KYHSQ SndITFFEQ421tWcxYhaKMQUc0MRQs8UorS4Vu/6arKymrKqsf0YIPdD2V0qVbR8Jh4SGh51NCxzu wQJQIBDRpLXWVIpfV6apDRiQZiMaIQRy6LE4/yjCRghIo4g8EQuTcUViLBY9aQjj/sqejR9EcEIO OON91/WlMSeNHfS6ch60C3dl1AsU0CuEtA4T1RF3k04FJ26XiUaQ6uRUTzWVBkSSr4dsHUvLcfAC IpOZegtuocsxYMAxU/likq6l24lyonNQiDCjECelUoVfqerlwYionhQzchiD9AowADPECj4Ab7BB SGo6zoB9WZKEqhPLoZiwplb+xWEFE+Q2UcgFKCharGa7MpNdW40ECZCJTTvaiv+sXJvk1lngsXNv iKbBGIJHBBBQZXmgv460GJdB/XwnECsMYOFB55CpBu2YAH8xYCvybgQ3ZqiBTAsGSJhtQKxlSdh+ qU10qWGrmWA0DBFHzAeOn54EHzwFJCsN+X+8YIJ+Ef53LdJDOLQbEF7MUqcINFIPHEQiGFEiEGQx p5fCR/fmrIm6tghGX/i6JtbBAzDSEO+2tS1zTWlrEmHRCRCCRR7BCDAM8DvfFy5avabbBgjEijGg 43wiOJAli+HEQ2fYukL+6XeHjggbCaQIDGGGLTohaI+5iYyJRHKLRW9E70SXkiIu2q4++/n+stDj hANMECjCDMUSWIYSIXihbneED7JiMUUIj7Z2R5otTBCPv/H2fqwQxIxG51OEH6G0mMIIhiCEFk4q sW3ejX90WW6MEGj3tYbf4b1eb2mpkbVwBAgEw5l9XCDQxnEREmF9Hw5/3GrD5otYgo4oooVwhb9d xRxHZKPY8L72P2ynTw2CBWIPEKNGQyHgyHF6OW+VQ/zOI4NEQ/iRn9TCPOKIzfyWLDeLp0tBbYPZ MpyxN0pDLwWFvMoU+4WySSTQrGARyxETbl8bG32+kwklEYkaeMul//k3z+/691gmxOSJvE7L5aML GcHEiwTKnWDDQNbHmPOjPwoUpsHETNQx5HNkxlCYYsx5Zi9CT4g81IWT0RrRgJGzUv8GETFrjJF7 G1YhYsPsrcsWJLs0pNyr/tRMWGody06uQKsxpl1BzfUHzguxtLpYAmOhFylG54JxPvdGttLkEUri +NljW0BiIZscxoDZlHNAzmXuEoWaabCY3xMangQ1ulnhgjlFREJi8xBkIgMywHRZcfCw3fzG8QWE 3T4jBJSf1un7GSCRB9c3vBsECjLEabLg5xsZfllzySDxVbKaF6ceuidHLuYuMQBEIKTkyn3M8cvf ajDeuS7NTNklIz5cxlEclslqC0r6n6U4tA6rZd4JgcALo4yovpUrC3kVyWXA4Q8rLV2kgQo8/W4Q iMiCRe9QenK06rB+Wh5zmUzgmYEibZYUVVZd9iCCJShhbsjBqCPD8fUO75ANom75TUI4mCtillIh A9BfxtkcXKOYRU5rabQOLi2Qz0AopVkYQx/217bNR793ubepnJ3DX7YPtEHIMxYpupq802pjXuNe Jm9eLRHWNObjbqdWUVAVAVDMKMCYYg4IBCxNlNNgZ7J5K41sXhBvKR7fxkVYUgutM10GcmIpR6OA PY0lLTbM2ukhAAN19nuzsFGYSSUBYShUYQCsRA4ILuJvSMGVdDvV0HBQCMK1eZIvvbAJtNj8dywh 8aVKK92rkI5aT4N7ZJc69bYc8zXywKMDCxffQlJigaYVSQiCSXwQPGuJWf7ggeAuxiM5YIGYGD9T zwQQwPl90wQLFtI++g4IFiSOpuY1WeWCCmAYqtvdv4sECyuabLcptvr8HtGKA6QdbVe2tsaz3R9R tza4+AjwBI5iaJTUEWcEBs4cgmrunWQcaqxoaepa7Tzm54bmh9aZ5yEWETUOEvKIRVszU3tPN7fV pXzx9O0oULW6495SYy0FhMECvvDyUw9S/EFrE/v925Mg9n6zk15PnvgYkgYkoEQw7vKmRQDNuFSn 9ajz/3eYPh3+C8YWlJH368+194+2/6QBRpqcVQERICZ+htuBl80ys/2lopkzDPGsZhsrhmd0o+Xe 6hKuJh5TcFgutly6gjZeMQmhIqlMOp94vADnc5jFdRWS4UJR5BYQsJ5ZlcA9ereJhITvEDPl/QIi q5hYrXIDn7AIo0JCLoQ1GYGJ8J/+GTYOluWFRkkAqcsADqEfLc+wHEBNBAoDfIABIjkIFojoJd4A j65bkGRuIJuMJSLkugmn1hOICgLESCZhCpoDwnhIAR/8gKRy5AUawXYJhP77AqBeKDcsEKMQEE/e gNxgRIRAIngjqDL0BAxW+EFAqJBxCSCUKDQHt6gMqA/yAwIDmkEQpHJAKYrSIIQiJLAFSAIPn/Ql QCUKUSz3IEF/kDo7Cazr8DAMIkQElj/R1YixALLIIEUEoXmAoWmB1YIWtCIkGEILJlwQFAQQKUEB CCox4EdxxcnRf9by6tXVMJQO4QtnwJJCTPRHTkzdn73/e7e2p/vOICDiBKZRYoaYqSDB8guD4XOG AAaYTCQQIC8ACpBbUIfXRSkKgiAowAIO6Py4AgRyFosDeLEJryEyAkBpFGIC8QCVa/YpiWIBBzJY 9CAgWCU4AMg8CoUCsT0LRQWTxA/xAyLAwsOQkA5oHSA0ugcEJBciNASrQjBDqAgn28C5iBNEHfwA uAglIS6EqUBQIC0wuoHTCWHTWUQIo4FBNCVf4AGEZCfuL9C2+XWGe4shILGEAAqQa9YDkgH6vbBB +0A/8YRt8vCyEEiQZF1cwxzgAuDl4VYxGgL7CGXCBaeMKi+BqEoCGcGCKP+Bo6LXSwVR84IQdBYV cnhRxwm8AMh5AwVgKcqCUWQ0EaDHiAFEQEJBBBAFKdTbAk/BPUkgFEzywMmBQ4qduykzYJ55PC/J ZCAkfhcrgdOFMkXEWvjOMkAEoxS46jmCBvGAf4VvjVfbn9XJAaUECTlRy3d1QTvLDeHWoxCCcq/C lqWlAaXwoLMocKlJ0SxTVJF9V8GuInJBB6llDbdygmTG6CpQVXZ4o1a71oBj5m9pPIin1aE41Jkw hLRM/NajCuIRgzPARoiQ7tcwKIHbiwQRaPNO+KCUxCwrhgnUhf0gyuu7MeKj1Rc3KsaIJHtqhFsT 64Li9wRvw6ys07FZv+9hcqhaugsxe74pGoMzalwEPMc1zEvCuG+8lX9muC3rCeMBBUPFwYJl4CLW IVRjziKhD8X57n/itB76OJ1yRcZQMWFEPjn4mXLOeZ3ofk4Sd5mtExl6wvC8GUmkiNHEtStAX6q6 ui2Ec5IuDDwvyl/Ete4JokPa5uVYp3tH9cwz3KCJYcCsuIuNoW4axKNU28lZr82scvXPBSKV/lho XClYVLwrx1nhEN4yozVZK00QsXJRmvE3sJ4hB46HfwfQXUfOhH3nZTXhxLEQZMrgKplyQbFDJvdz ewoJQMM2Cs1JMGFFzjJIZ46d0s8gWdRpLIUz40nhB0xReo37NoqeW6PgxRinzMpktRmbKocmMYwp aA+gBUSQH1ajzlqt0NRcEVJGdQmkyLOEiroj4fiWPJaUgB4XlByYLN8oJtUYl/sEmwjhDsmS6jAg qkpsGjTSHI/taq0gCRQmg1zUhRlhL0MpCjHFTdmeHFkQpnQRVH1jP9Ys6r+E4SEkw0GmnqLVkdCb Sqm000HZbo3gxQWDWLh2RIOAgpEBUbmjQoMNN5BARwrmy1EXAj2uqGTAwTKaoEAoaQYWIigR7Jl6 FWCMjCg4ggyUj+BBDAKbphxCJijFSpj4nieJ/gkPhnqMisLZKsEiEYXD+n/BVJLBmmSDAM0YowZa MCQNhN1+ehaOsFWO0sDCXR3YnYrPwJQ0iihqBhKAiFtrDh5mjYz7V2CkwUkMldi2xFCT1k89StMm LuRVW+AG8oK5s5OJ4rOMsvFUF+xNYmDoFhIczNypAVn5MOnAjxFUBOMGNQwIPUjHTWX2RLWJlfDI BAomEonqFApfnpYaHjlFQRR+56DIohzUfh2z528WLXBECGGxUJySoRZ38n6hty8PzCVXiGf48UEr 7qdodit0mLEBvGh0K5RVQy1eZV3WjK5pIY+KQHFyYODBL6DH9gqc5CcP4+IGMscnBJkliTJCQyaS UEa1WXZlY6KLB5ITwwJImDhUCRAZQNhP0o2XhMB3CoRU4+AiOBphflHCbOZx9/rug1HoDFf+ZfBZ 8r0qevOLxOWlOinUsOTGMZJv0+KsNxQSSkWobWufSMhwzCNW8gqYh+JIs0SqxEsFMmDIjtPIIN/E cKk2qzIhimXkFFM19MJeeUSwrNeO0dNiXvPAT5FnbR+gAAABDOC2LJNQpEPsOBgBoAwAAAABGiKu YsTdz6OckZgIGYW7nCuDy8cAQ0gOYQFgAEIgAAAGAFYICoADeMAAACAAYQBYADeHAK4A3lOCGA4G FC5oQGAzDAoCAGAAz+gMZDAwwYACCAFAIDEMMEAAgAYANYwECBAY4AAAgFAzAAAAIe2AYeAEAP8s Mt7ABECMGAVecqwvcQ0fLEq19OwFZ5Go/ntXhF+34HQ2DPjGAAA2AG2AFTAAZ6cgHB4LMHgzzu1j SowBWHnvwAADQAAwABgBhJC9jej1DRwNaAAB+AwADP0AEgAMAAXgAlBgNkJf3S53qOg4QawtTQdG pVvg5Rw3YINYWLu7clrgCIPcACNNDIhHCRYBx4h2ANCGPCgyCEz/QxpqrYwAxAbYRgwTXgEXh+BA UTJyc5veVmCUfAAAMBILOY2QQSmeAoQGFggxLjHEk7HNcWML8NAJm+cAybRM/8K5gK1GBJgCrzYF icx/1XmHVIjUotZEnOULBIAJ56NuAyYAG2ICJGAD2AYABcwAJDYf4ECCAAxAW6kEKPQoMN8GDgis JfmGAYEvBggGDBEOYQDgACQAAACQYAAACSYji/HxiEU3ncipsxTbsNzeTQ/aVXE/STYwyCAEAAGA GwDFtG33wXa6BZhQRKNXgYyABgAYZiTjPhxEb2FxJpNAAABgAEGABgMAAAQAACATAAAABAAAQCAH AAMCIIPxCAYgDCxgDCGYCEEQy5aZgG8h4gR2oFO0KfKxOR1rM34ENeBhAAZgB4BLzi8DGQwAhxwM MCESGEjNSGDwCDwCBgBsAJ5AXGPPAAnhzMBAFDsA8AAUMAAAAAERtACwdAAACEgASAAQjFqAqGhw in6s42WaZRVXEEx+iONVUumrYNbk7GacuLcFF5HsaVRK3tdq4Oa2BzWpBJ+wBCY920jscv6zIcMV H6i+ZHCrLEATaTRpDxSKKclO0u5Y8QXSUHaav4J2nSb2wRH5it850CJzKABicGgudcyffAJMNPJY z2WniBHFzgmEPoc6XPtCtaT2mqxflFBw7r0EZ1ylTC02i5c0auMhqlgqp7izwKWmx0Ug10wTWNAZ OVhe3xGcVV8qhW5rVzYo8Hyt6xlTxSQHqaqKm6WFGdjFNaX3VeAJ83WjE2nPJZvARuzg6YAAAAES BAWMRxAUggAQxgAAAAAAAAAgAAAAAAAABROaqaAwFMgAQAAAAAABgAAAACSFerk06o0IGAMABggB AAP060Ahp4ABAAHxzyQxTwILDb+NggJGI9d60wpO8hL2gEifvuc1bQwW1V7olu9Hsz2ZG+NonGMq OEk5t+Z7y1cCPwgvOSnoAKkZUUTtxvqb+feGFypDIa4CLmunndtXTv/PkXDLb0aJsjwF6a6eiYtz Ec2jZwIj0d/BOFfE+b+vmBv9giVkeiR1ssvTpMIw8pKWLJH6gmgGknk+Vb5S9wkm67MuEjAr5xGz BDLz1NB2l+lfkCo6cpbIBWHXMSGJiM4oEB4OGlVzW/Pj63KPbv0F5x57lI+Xs86XwaIsmejjoKg7 4OW9HydXNF2mmnBFniwW2Xo3n31dsPcfPIZ7yTwEfzdAxEXYZTlYHPj4L+/JY8cSjxpL4jTfs10k JtHh+HTPuL40R5i+SsPm3FV7XOOGcE3PE8iWR6PR/hz+/xMgu++m/RuhdIWBNEPqyRzt4P7Z4z8c cfYEb/9xVO0b5a66E5vFiPlRS5fZ634+KsqlJFbrK1SaKUuPIEgkgoqyyqCwtLo+rFIl3ZAuV/ts EUnnYCZidELS6yYAJt9WNO8Vkk57ayluwKvxuhPU5y5O7/xO3dW34nYHfYHCziMRmCM1K3SupP7J 3X0PFuI61SM7bOij3Gpwqu2kZRdX3vNzRPi2p+eIEe34IEAptxcmuzeqjB1YeOQsiiBC6Y08glyB qV+LRHKiRK2gx0dHRPqVWZoILQChqdBBUZRGKJkEZcFXIYcFOyKUYA7aIAGYMADlihIRmwBgIACP xLpIYgEV8KRlkXKqfxUNoYzNt/RZhI+ebjCGfGuhnYo3Z9hea9GYDu1aQFcmAb/ITFkNSk7iOZ0S KKLt6dTusG2o7ziGaa33K2ENhx0b51ChCdV06GqNsLxDHLBdHo/ImLKqk/GKbo+zZlylk8j/KJA1 MyZswQh+0OIrLtimjszaGOwDM/3niU7EVvuSTUz+DwbmW3njstFjm7b9OXvBhYnej1u8gD4iz9KT li4dLFR4Pjr78g0WcOCF6Ypi5oGYkU0xn4On32m/uNgcgM32hg+F+KeVFA7WePB/H18vK7fD5y23 DjCmYlYc58GrcQhz4cTPFT0H/36PSPy0sa7+Rm48Hli76Tay12vNMNC2gUxgZpDDnPJa+Gm8qT2H 0cxMctBIzQ28u/av/9J88mFB/XvcaEOFvdL3EwCYZiv6Gh1yZB0OWMRit/rP+pP94pTHJ7avoejW tZ+2J1gzIM+Gx4SFC++wNIwcBugwtWi4+mzS4N9BelONf0tpbqt86YDPOhVerRdb2V+Q9/y8FHd+ 3HusHRS/fBSNIuUzmBfIcjXfazrBx7aTzhOTs2vbOCnCFPeVUS/QwTh7r1MFH2d/rKPb/1Ey4/BC KmwD9BdhgZdSYvWR+DqHPwdUl42rEIikKYTLkikNJHMgDwREZrJIXx6KZcpKB50cj7PiJ/hMgAAA ARNORxu0KArBbHKqXhcZJJJWum+anzcRN0myCVTeD1dBnVve8A+fv/U62aVw8lSsgWWrOLVAtmZM TczR/JLhCespGxAJQqXRMyjWmVAEQBgqQoVcddvcuTb7g/Z6CoC5CrV0grciYjpKaLKcsZGCZwQi OebNmCyi5NysjFFRYJysJSCJWeixRWmiBdJiqhAWGR3vUYst7wt71MIKZo5IAsMuS+J4lyKZV+bU 525Eyy04GJIGKCygZNnLKgOByjfzllFMe+3MiViFMhBAFlESGmJCiEECrgIQQQQhBBRBqX2KIQiS yLBFFKAsuftesFKwBBCyxHreIRBJCACghn+ogBBVQgolFBySiCHAEQQxkiCSiAcU5fJMtlqpLoNK yqyy0oNiXnsprzJ44I6i9skVagpZFrAtImbXmqEnEWhPjyZI6E4WkmI9mUbpByfsDnXcubr3VKka PiOOO142BAdzZM1i7lvr58IMO2sw6KYuKYNCO1uWEGdAznZIl0ojbRCzOiDi0HOb4XCBeZZVzDNU jI63DU4DvlIF+GwUv58+bggmSYRcXMRcVxGO7LPlpsZaTxYj58qQblTU+OSBSQP1YGWVyjz3SQsR XFVuXIuRVza1F6Z1ZvdrosHrDBphyHIJIVCi0Fkv79KNg2s0BJGwYEgTW4VnSIdNJSkdZhKPmaBx mhOJN+JzxFnLkgMAbgxgEhcKjsCCB08CPN9pRZyR0vzxGNCRSgmirznWD4jHyD9CLiWqiDrf6Q9f 5Y/D9bFiNhL7O+f4nADaZXYk7EzsCJwYQwToqLsWou6Koiw6ZWWAGUoYcZI0lQmRLYwpJWTeZcJP T8y1Rfg2j2qdUbaf4qgVN4fY/WNvMsfJM7EBQske0VqEnsfOjzouX1PN5SVW9F0xmZVmuAoPd09G CJnQW4E6zppQSeKReI+eEzLifzUtOsmVJ/nM2DoZyfV8lvSeZyXJFJwXNJjopd6AaE/CICDpVgyy krqmaOS50FlU8gY60Ao1U4RIHzD8MvGxjNJGZWHF4RHriKp3EFN/wbkQrLa+C+zSw7s0ToNqBMFf KPClQkf0tO84NSlUCKxcrmC+n5JEWN0zDzNQK/+Uib1iVzdf+XVAwfz/kRHq5X8fWtQyzLub6Rko IvmWHg7aYO559/G4KKnIVYyieYXZYWlLWrS36B05Efh4MqNXBwSvT24ZkuB5rvnRP8wp+sYU+c2P nyp4+UoI+EpZSnhNEz6SI09qyrEtkkWDylmoeqbvBg15Ljs1XaorCF1E6LQp/Ewg7W4QKeW4qXBd lGCKMoqbYtuO19ca+CvpDthsJcdDY4qEVZH8RqLnGZnEERxHceIvgjZ6kSkaNdipKzPA4MDgm+tF WnnjTEfT4sA3hqkPp74WO7Ks9ia0pWzytzRFciDxHHmfDzM2hY5kLjoo7L7wmShCTvmVtHnokmBa wIlqNmvFUnflk+mB2sk1iuCSYSVphcPJ0RPSGbzuEECNbHTcuCN1rFx0L1JGXgyh+JAaURdMX8bh vF0ZosdCrskWGX95UaDJ5Mym4+KHxYSJo2mqls5OSsnTBTSmsRLsoZJ8k+2wHyRcklXR0F+Im2M4 x9kz4Im0ZqemF2s2cXRzFwX7rIbbCA+Ws9LouyqpiXltaDQYdJUJaMmgG8sa9sp3NGTFPjmdg+ll jCknmR9qsTOiXkRGbyjOm/+RGm5JQojI/0v1HiWNRK3SNed+4OgcNm+wEINZBBipkYN5lMjJL92I pCWDuZjZAwyChEPUpwQgYg8EVkJvqMLpjHNYI00gwJpE07JZmo2ZVpI8P5kLYJqSt2DCyQQ0hTOj KaMUEydFBsYzkg8PChzAgrIKGhTdSMXzMzDk4v3JwQcYCbGKmHNIwYQtEQ0baHJExFyCWzRIt+aL yqdIh5goxiZhR7SDgIqtaZUYKM7JqSVdEJ4ztUygxDIXR1ElkUZwfw4UW64QQo9HJh1SuKIUaeJk LIiXFG32IC2aFVORINH6lBEgvAsmt4zMiZ7Bh6IDGYgoytHh9GMWDBCRIkYU2Zhz0nAxBhiDIRCR FRmNEjZzrhBxRh6McaNng6JukUIIFxYUzLuRFL/KVzDe1bHcmUPJI0iTn+mNhF9txqK7U3EhCegP tsxtw1G26iAqBaToLh0GK4bMjyvCgrnOJQWUm69vTFhP9ukQWyFnaOpeC//iRS+ZZtfQMGvT8kXE HnIWTCiMqB4sjnp4P5SDSRXAxNF6W8J89Sj3liPgVcxdyxYn0rO5YWj9Pg8Lmj4Q90YgT55Zwm5G WQWHIypgNKga0yg6oumO0n6kSygUPEBkn5euEUlwwB1WsHJisNitY7DBhHDCCj2BKeYjrUTY6kVy oPhGUCoTQWfntKfgIgrOwUTxdiaPgLecdTZdJOWLmcoqsZ9JAx2PXhx1FImCi8qEmXlWNsKoNUY4 21qWFF9Cs6CDqwnDinTcgaRValX4cPDtvBNYXB/KCK4tsNxNSSUFIWop50SPdgTBKRSqRV9NIcpP ZuhGQs0lzwUlKzTPYeHgcEuAaW8raXZUDVTG5WWFRRmduzPfHzIseEPyXlij1/Jg8FRpsSBNQniW IIREZ165BPiucte8151XJkTy6borACqTmfiMuFKi7ayIqapI8kJ9tONXIF2Kz0ToAq0ZJYwi5z7M +AlLtzS4x/axmCJ0RcSA7AqVhcmDwvizhEWTOq1uGBbiZ7dR4TENyDFViq7CcwRrYXlL4WeDW3gJ jBnhyNApRDDAxENJB2kyghRFXYksOgI68z52WuBryvMUoUtwWLzitzSLe+ZCleFg5Sqyky7KB9Ch 1cLpNBQH1cr8mNKfeXQptz8jKCdFy7K5ylWcSNMv5ObaSjTTIsRpEdlovnNFsdAtI8ePF3cFyqlv peRaZoVxSZVMHO6Z8z0mQnWfe7kyeOFoZnh1Pi37i6suYzhrY0CXCydpH0ZpOtQZ23p0uH+M94aE 0BZAOHq6JGDSFuzLzIWnnYnivVJU83DJFphHCHexJCom8L4QUADhSYtM/yeSMnZJzJY7n8MsHlUV kijN3ufEmvE1iu6qipifA4nCXpBFcnqJn2Xd/imtC5BnStswUyX+Fky/OmxfXJy1GARWycvEbKdM Q/kVfVrTiwPZHFI+liqeqQvwA90rU2a5Jr54Kkr3IN0kQbOsqkjr9vQipzJFOy+is9KKJMEvoil6 q9hwg9lfjgJeP42GfWewnCaQ70fjsH0qI2dMRzZUGRDPnZIKw0AWflLKScn4zRd4z6FnBwTR8Bkf 8E658lCwk+k3pqLmdy5TUdMR0JuKVIUATpRNT4DGSoWyq8k1bBPUApGzdakpVin+DgVsGX58IjeK UMEkzLrtC1Khfy7dbPdRenzZwriqJltayk/Y64UrbukrJUWfLPE+kQl4XmxVh2HLlitjU8WJkMCe mk/zWl53mZjnQJnG3rozPh4HBzRzVJzWqTYJk3wdOyPClMcQFHPOeRYAPtKK5kiT2SOZ5Ss5NMbe yKLnb9wb7VKmz6DhETmhNroUUbJzvSOgEL4lnq2sS3iHxxc/DLXpqBizPgrWfbcg2zpMYUS/vFwA 6ERZNc78g573XXiX0ViptNpWtfdl5oHXOKhbiqssj4y9mYhEwoJQzfa14bcMxzFWzO4ECAr6WmxR KgNZckVyKxfwHkWf/pDFDfpkFgTLUcUrKyPyCnZfxcgoph9ZC3caMkE8gwumZDiPyLnnKhEajHq5 /Iw=DocumentLibraryFormDocumentLibraryFormDocumentLibraryForm This value indicates the number of saves or revisions. The application is responsible for updating this value after each revision. daniel.hailsAndrew Grogan22021-02-17T14:46:00Z2021-02-17T14:46:00Z0581800395958Microsoft Office Word01845418falseTitle1false113543falsefalse16.00000x0101005F9CEB577456074CAD332EC164A91C29