Ms Mari Margil:

To echo Dr Doran, in the international sphere we agree that we would like to see the rights of nature moved into international agreements and instruments. We have the universal declaration of the rights of Mother Earth, which we helped to draft several years ago. This has now been brought into the UN General Assembly for consideration. The UN Convention on Biological Diversity has had mention of rights of nature. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has also acknowledged rights of nature and is now considering how that integrates with the human right to a healthy environment. We are seeing a move into the international debate and into different international instruments as well.

Regarding how this has had practical impact, Ecuador has had this in its constitution for 15 years now. Its enforcement and implementation is the most robust because it has had it in there the longest. In certain cases, yes, it has certainly had very practical benefit on the ground for nature. One of the most renowned cases was decided by Ecuador's constitutional court, its highest court, in 2021. This was about Los Cedros protected forest in which mining exploration had been authorised by the government. This is a cloud forest in a fragile ecosystem and the habitat of endangered species. In a case brought by the local community, it was determined that such extractive mining activity within a fragile ecosystem and the habitat of endangered species would violate the rights of nature so that mining could not take place there.

Number one it was identified as a violation of the rights of nature, and that was in the enforcement of those rights. Importantly, in addition, the court indicated that the environmental ministry in Ecuador had to adapt its mining permits or its licensing to ensure that those permits when issued to a mining corporation could not interfere with the health or well-being of nature, meaning it had to conform and uphold the rights of nature standard. The rights of nature, therefore, is elevating the standards and changing how government decisions are made so that government decision making, whether it be about mining or other industry, is not interfering with the health and well-being of natural systems. We see this elsewhere in cases regarding the protection of mangroves, for example, when they have industrial activities such as shrimp farming in these incredibly important coastal ecosystems. That kind of industrial activity is interfering with the well-being of the ecosystem and, therefore, is a violation of the rights of nature, and decisions cannot be made to allow that activity to occur. Through the courts in Ecuador we are seeing a much higher standard of protection for nature and ensuring that governmental decision making, including around different kinds of industrial activities, must conform with what nature needs to be healthy, have well-being, and be resilient. The idea is that human activity should not interfere with the ability of nature to exist, to be healthy, and to provide what we need to continue to exist as well.