SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
ecuador
The Rights of Nature: A Paradigm Shift for Environmental Protection
This revolutionary legal framework moves beyond traditional environmental laws and acknowledges that Nature itself has inherent rights, much like human beings and corporations.
Apr 21, 2025
For centuries, legal systems around the world have treated Nature as property—something to be owned, exploited, and managed for human benefit. This anthropocentric perspective has led to widespread environmental degradation, climate change, and biodiversity loss.
However, a revolutionary legal framework is emerging: the recognition of the Rights of Nature. This paradigm shift moves beyond traditional environmental laws and acknowledges that Nature itself has inherent rights, much like human beings and corporations.
The Rights of Nature concept is based on the idea that ecosystems and species are not mere objects but living entities with their own inherent rights to exist, thrive, and evolve. This legal framework challenges the prevailing notion that Nature is merely a resource for human use and instead recognizes its intrinsic value. By granting legal personhood to rivers, forests, and other natural entities, governments and courts can ensure that these ecosystems have standing in legal proceedings.
By shifting from an exploitative to a respectful relationship with the natural world, humanity can ensure a healthier planet for future generations.
The movement gained global attention when Ecuador became the first country to enshrine the Rights of Nature in its Constitution in 2008. The document states that Nature, or "Pachamama," has the right to exist and regenerate. Similarly, Bolivia passed the Law of Mother Earth in 2010, reinforcing Indigenous worldviews that see Nature as a living system with rights. Since then, countries such as New Zealand, Panama, India, and Colombia have also granted legal rights to specific ecosystems, setting legal precedents that continue to inspire the global community.
Why should we grant rights to Nature, you might ask? Traditional environmental laws often fail to prevent ecological destruction because they are based on regulation rather than protection. Corporations and governments can exploit loopholes, pay fines, or simply weigh the financial cost of pollution against profit margins. The Rights of Nature framework, however, fundamentally shifts the legal system from one of ownership to one of stewardship.
One of the most compelling cases for this approach is the Whanganui River in New Zealand. In 2017, the New Zealand government recognized the river as a legal entity, granting it the same rights and responsibilities as a person. This decision was made in collaboration with the Whanganui iwi, the Indigenous Māori people who have long regarded the river as an ancestor. Now, legal guardians, including representatives from both the government and the Māori community, speak on behalf of the river in legal matters. This recognition has already influenced policy decisions related to conservation and sustainable water management. Similarly, in 2017, the High Court of Uttarakhand in India granted legal rights to the Ganges and Yamuna rivers, acknowledging their sacred and ecological importance. Although this ruling faced legal challenges, it sparked important discussions about environmental governance and the need for stronger protections for vital ecosystems.
Despite these victories, the implementation of the Rights of Nature faces legal, political, and economic challenges. Many governments and corporations resist this shift, fearing restrictions on industrial activities. Additionally, enforcement mechanisms vary widely, and some legal rulings remain symbolic without proper institutional backing. However, the movement continues to gain momentum. Local communities, Indigenous groups, and environmental activists are advocating for the recognition of Nature's rights as a crucial tool for fighting climate change and biodiversity loss. In the United States, cities such as Pittsburgh and Toledo have passed local ordinances recognizing the rights of ecosystems, empowering communities to challenge environmental destruction more effectively.
Ecuador has witnessed several groundbreaking legal victories that affirm Nature's rights. Among these, the 2021 Constitutional Court ruling on Los Cedros Reserve was historic: The court halted mining exploration in this biodiversity hotspot, recognizing that the rights of the forest and its species, including endangered monkeys and orchids, outweighed extractive interests. Similarly, in Intag, a region long defended by local communities, legal actions based on behalf of endangered frogs and the Rights of Nature have helped suspend mining operations that threatened primary cloud forests and rivers vital to both people and ecosystems.
Another notable case is Estrellita, a woolly monkey rescued from illegal trafficking. When authorities attempted to relocate her to a zoo, a judge ruled in favor of her individual rights as part of Nature—marking the first time an animal in Ecuador was granted such recognition. These cases underscore the growing power of constitutional rights when applied to real-life conflicts between conservation and exploitation. They also reflect the tireless advocacy of Indigenous peoples, environmental defenders, and legal experts who are reshaping the legal landscape to center ecological integrity and the interconnectedness of all life.
The Rights of Nature framework is more than just a legal concept—it is a cultural and ethical transformation. By shifting from an exploitative to a respectful relationship with the natural world, humanity can ensure a healthier planet for future generations. As this movement grows, it is essential for policymakers, legal scholars, and citizens alike to support and advance this revolutionary approach to environmental protection.
The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature (GARN) is a global network that has been at the forefront of the Earth Jurisprudence and Rights of Nature movement for the last 15 years, educating, upholding, and supporting its growth. With over 6,000 allies worldwide, GARN serves as a movement hub, connecting Indigenous leaders, civil society, lawyers, and advocates reshaping environmental governance.
Keep ReadingShow Less
34 US Lawmakers Urge Biden to Pardon Steven Donziger
"We are deeply concerned about the chilling effect this case will have on all advocates working on behalf of other frontline communities, victims of human rights violations, and those seeking environmental justice."
Dec 11, 2024
More than 30 Democratic members of Congress on Wednesday called on outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden to pardon environmental and human rights lawyer Steven Donziger, who endured nearly 1,000 days in prison and house arrest after successfully representing Ecuadoreans harmed by Big Oil's pollution of the Amazon rainforest.
In a
letter to Biden led by Rep. Jim McGovern, (D-Mass.), 33 House and Senate Democrats plus Independent U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont noted the "troubling legal irregularities" in Donziger's case, which have been "criticized as unconstitutional or illegal by three federal judges, 68 Nobel laureates, and five high-level jurists from the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention of the United Nations."
Donziger represented a group of Ecuadorean farmers and Indigenous people in a 1990s lawsuit against Texaco—which was later acquired by Chevron—over the oil company's deliberate dumping of billions of gallons of carcinogenic waste into the Amazon. He played a key role in winning a $9.5 billion settlement against Chevron in Ecuadorian courts.
However, Chevron fought Donziger in the U.S. court system, and when the attorney refused to disclose privileged client information to the company, federal District Judge Lewis Kaplan—who was invested in Chevron—held him in misdemeanor contempt of court. Loretta Preska, Kaplan's handpicked judge to preside over Donziger's contempt trial, is affiliated with the Chevron-funded Federalist Society.
Donziger's case drew worldwide attention and solidarity, with human rights experts and free speech groups joining progressive U.S. lawmakers in demanding his release. He was released in April 2022 after 993 days in prison and house arrest.
"Donziger is the only lawyer in U.S. history to be subject to any period of detention on a misdemeanor contempt of court charge," the 34 lawmakers wrote. "We believe that the legal case against Mr. Donziger, as well as the excessively harsh nature of the punishment against him, are directly tied to his prior work against Chevron. We do not make this accusation lightly or without evidentiary support."
The legislators warned:
Notwithstanding the personal hardship, this unprecedented legal process has imposed on Mr. Donziger and his family, we are deeply concerned about the chilling effect this case will have on all advocates working on behalf of other frontline communities, victims of human rights violations, and those seeking environmental justice. Those who try to help vulnerable communities will feel as though tactics of intimidation—at the hands of powerful corporate interests, and, most troublingly, the U.S. courts—can succeed in stifling robust legal representation when it is needed most. This is a dangerous signal to send.
"Pardoning Mr. Donziger," the lawmakers added, "would send a powerful message to the world that billion-dollar corporations cannot act with impunity against lawyers and their clients who defend the public interest."
The lawmakers join more than 100 environmental and human rights groups that have urged Biden to pardon Donziger.
In an April opinion piece published by Common Dreams, Donziger contended that "I need this pardon because I am the only person in U.S. history to be privately prosecuted by a corporation."
"More specifically, the government (via a pro-corporate judge) gave a giant oil company (Chevron) the power to prosecute and lock up its leading critic," he continued. "As a result of this unprecedented and frightening private prosecution, I still cannot travel out of the country and I have been prohibited from meeting with clients I have represented for over three decades. Nor can I practice law, maintain a bank account, or earn a livelihood."
"No matter where one stands on the political spectrum," Donziger added, "we should all be able to agree that what happened to me should not happen to anybody in any country that adheres to the rule of law."
The appeal for a Donziger pardon comes amid a
wave of eleventh-hour pleas from lawmakers for Biden to grant clemency to figures ranging from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden to Indigenous activist Leonard Peltier—often described as the nation's longest-jailed political prisoner—and federal death row inmates including Billie Jerome Allen, who advocates say was wrongly convicted of murder.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ecuador Fails to Eliminate Gas Flaring Despite Court Order: Amnesty
"It's not just Ecuador it's affecting," said one woman leading the fight against gas flaring, "it's the atmosphere of the entire world."
Aug 12, 2024
More than three years after a court ruling that left a group of young women hopeful that their legal action had helped "restore nature" for future generations in Ecuador, a report by Amnesty International on Monday found that gas flaring that the Provincial Court of Justice of Sucumbíos had ordered to be eliminated has actually continued—threatening public health and a just energy transition.
In its report, titled The Amazon Is Burning! The Future Is Burning!, Amnesty found the Ecuadorian government and public and private oil companies have avoided "any concrete and ambitious steps to remove the flares," instead taking measures that will allow them to "maintain oil production at all costs."
Following a legal action brought by nine women and girls from Sucumbíos and Orellana, supported by the Union of People Affected by Texaco's Oil Operations (UDAPT), the court ruled in January 2021 that Ecuador had ignored the rights that the plantiffs had to live in a healthy environment, and ordered that gas flares be shut down with officials prioritizing the removal of flares near population centers.
The flares burn natural gas, a byproduct of oil extraction—long a top industry in Ecuador—and the air pollution it causes has been linked to health problems including cancer.
A 2017 study by Clínica Ambiental found higher incidences of cancer among people who lived near oil facilities and gas flares in the Ecuadorian Amazon. A lawyer representing the women and girls and UDAPT also said two years of research had found 251 cases of cancer in Sucumbíos and Orellana, with women accounting for 71% of them.
As Amnesty noted, gas flaring is also linked to the emission of super pollutants like methane, which is around 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide in terms of its global heating potential.
Complying with the 2021 ruling in the case against the Ecuadorian Ministry of Energy and Non-Renewable Natural Resources and the Ministry of Environment and Water is a matter of "climate, environmental, and racial justice," said Ana Piquer, Americas director at Amnesty.
"The Ecuadorian state must put an end to the routine burning of gas in flares, a practice that is today endangering the Amazon, the world and the future of the children who will inherit the planet," said Piquer.
Amnesty verified that at least 52 gas flare sites are within three miles of population centers, continuing to put local communities at risk despite the provincial court's ruling.
In a video posted to social media by Amnesty, Evelyn Mora, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said the global community will ultimately be affected by Ecuador's refusal to comply with the 2021 ruling.
"It's not just Ecuador it's affecting," she said of the oil industries' continued use of gas flares, "it's the atmosphere of the entire world."
Amnesty emphasized that state-owned and private companies in countries including Ecuador, Brazil, Venezuela, and the United States use routine flaring during oil extraction as a cost-cutting measure in marginalized and low-income areas known as "sacrifice zones."
"By eliminating gas flares and committing to a transition to a fossil fuel-free economy, Ecuador can become a standard bearer for climate and environmental justice for the sake of the planet, now and in the future," said Piquer. "Oil 'wealth' has never reached the Ecuadorian Amazon; rather, the region is a large oil sacrifice zone where children, including the girls and young women in the gas flares case, are one of the most vulnerable population groups."
The group's report calls on the Ecuadorian government to take steps including:
- Designing and implementing a plan to eliminate the use of gas flares as soon as possible to comply with the 2021 ruling;
- Accelerating the removal of gas flares within three miles of population centers and requesting the necessary technical assistance to prevent methane leakage and other emissions;
- Phasing out fossil fuels and transition to renewable energy in a manner consistent with human rights by 2030, respecting the rights of oil industry workers; and
- Working with the Indigenous peoples of the Amazon to develop plans in accordance with their values and providing them with the necessary means to implement them.
Piquer credited "the courageous girls and young women plaintiffs in the gas flares case" with showing the global community "that children and young people around the world are urgently demanding climate, racial, and gender justice, as well as radical changes for human rights and nature."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular