The most important elephant in the world today was born in Thailand in the 1970s. She was wild - but not for long. Less than a year later, the humans arrived. They stole her from her family and flew her across the Pacific. 

In the USA, she wore a polka-dot dress and gave rides. Today, she lives in a one acre cage in New York's Bronx Zoo.

Happy's life may soon take a turn. In 2018, lawyers filed a claim of unlawful detention, called a habeas corpus petition, on Happy's behalf. They argue that she is a person.

In the new year, a court will decide whether to set HappyHappy was named after Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. She has lived alone since Grumpy, her companion, was attacked by two other elephants and euthanised.  free. If the petition is granted, it will have huge implications. 

Humanity's relationship with nature has never been more crucial.

Elephants are extraordinary creatures. They live in families, grieve for the dead and can suffer and understand suffering. 

This is not Happy's first time in the spotlight. In 2005, she became the first elephant to pass the mirror self-identification testHappy repeatedly touched an X painted on her forehead, a place she could not see without a mirror. , an indicator of self-awareness. 

The philosopher Gary Varner argues that if personhood is defined as conscious awareness of one's past, present and future, then elephants "might be persons - or at least near-persons". 

Personhood in the everyday sense is not the same as personhood as a legal concept. In US law, both corporations and ships are considered persons. 

For the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP), who brought Happy's case to the court, the petition is part of a civil rights movement. When the USA became a nation, women, slaves and children did not have personhood. 

The NhRP believe that we will look back at Happy's life with horror. If intelligent animals are given some of the same rights as humans, then it could end suffering. 

Others disagree. Granting elephants' personhood would raise questions. Some, like US professor Richard Cupp, fear it could open the floodgates. What would happen to farm animals?   

Cupp worries that extending personhood could threaten humans. "Society might be tempted not only to look at more intelligent animals as being like humans," he says, "but start to think of less intelligent humans a little more like animals".

Even Joshua Plotnik, the scientist who ran the mirror test, is sceptical. Happy, like all animals, cannot speak. Why should the NhRP represent her? 

Still, the landscape is changing. In 2016, an Argentinian court granted great apes legal personhood. The EU acknowledges animals as sentientAble to perceive or feel things.. Last month, a US court recognised hipposThe hippos were once owned by drug boss Pablo Escobar, and are now living free in the Colombian countryside. The Colombian government is seeking to kill or sterilise them. as "interested persons" in a lawsuit. Some say it is only a matter of time before Happy is free. 

Yes. Happy is an intelligent creature who has led a life of suffering. Nearly half of Americans believe animals should have the same rights as humans. Granting Happy human rights is the next step on a journey to an equal world. 

No. Human rights should be reserved for humans. If elephants are granted personhood, it opens the door for chickens to enjoy the same rights. There are better ways to help Happy, like putting pressure on zoos or changing animal welfare laws.