From
the Huffington Post
New
Zealand's Whanganui River Gains A Legal Voice
18
September, 2012
If
corporations are people now, why can’t rivers be?
Under
a landmark agreement, signed in New Zealand earlier this summer, the
Whanganui River has become a legal entity with a legal voice.
The
agreement is the result of over a hundred years of advocacy by the
Whanganui iwi, an indigenous community with a long history of
reliance on the river and its bountiful natural resources.
The
Whanganui, the third longest river in New Zealand, will be recognized
as a person under the law “in the same way a company is, which will
give it rights and interests,” Christopher Finlayson, a
spokesperson for the Minister of Treaty Negotiations, told the New
Zealand Herald.
Organizations
that work to protect the rights of indigenous communities worldwide
are celebrating the agreement as an affirmation of the inextricable
relationship between indigenous communities and natural ecosystems.
“The
recognition of the personhood of the Whanganui River represents a
landmark moment in legal history,” Suzanne Benally, the Executive
Director of Cultural Survival, wrote in an email to TakePart. “Nature
cannot be seen solely as a resource to be owned, exploited and
profited from; it is a living and sustaining force that needs to be
honored, respected, and protected by all of us.”
Treehugger
points out that this isn’t the first time the natural world has
received monumental rights—or a good lawyer.
In
2008, Ecuador became the first nation in the world to recognize the
legal rights of its mountains, rivers, and land.
Frustrated
by the exploitation of the Amazon and the Andes by multinational
mining and oil corporations, delegates in Ecuador turned to the
Pennsylvania-based Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund to help
rewrite the country’s constitution.
The
delegates wanted to provide legal protection for Ecuador’s
environment and its resources. The Legal Defense Fund helped them
include a “Rights of Nature” framework in their constitution that
allows people to sue on behalf of an ecosystem.
In
2011, the new law got its first test. A suit was brought on against
the Provincial Government of Loja, on behalf of the Vilcabama River
in Ecuador.
The
local Loja government had allowed a road that abutted the river to be
widened, which forced rocks and debris into the watershed and caused
large floods that affected communities living on its banks.
As
a result of the “rights of nature” provisions in Ecuador’s
constitution, the judge decided in favor of the river. The
municipality of Loja was forced to halt the project and rehabilitate
the area.
Ecuador’s
new constitution has been an inspiration to communities and
governments all over the world who want greater protections for their
local resources.
“People
not only in the U.S. but also in other countries are saying to
themselves that something is fundamentally wrong with our
environmental legal frameworks,” says Mari Margil, associate
director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund.
“Temperatures
are rising, fisheries are disappearing, and forests are being cutt
down. We need to move to a different kind of environmental
protection. Our current environmental laws are all about how much we
can use or exploit nature,” she told TakePart.
Margil’s
organization has worked with communities in New Hampshire, Virginia,
and Pennsylvania to shift their thinking about how they can preserve
and sustain their natural resources. Earlier this year, Margil and
her colleagues helped launch the first “rights of nature”
organization in Italy.
The
Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and other current environmental
laws actually legalize environmental harm by regulating how much
pollution and degradation to an ecosystem is lawful, Margil says.
Under existing law, nature is considered to be property.
The
Legal Defense Fund is at the center of a movement that believes
climate change and other growing international issues require new
ways of thinking. “Ecosystems and natural communities are not
merely property that can be owned,” according to the organizaton’s
website, “but are entities that have an independent right to
flourish.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.