The rights of nature: one step forward, three steps backwards

Abstract

The recognition of nature as subject of law made by the constitutions of Ecuador (2008) and Bolivia (2009) represents a break in civilization that hits directly to the heart of the almost-extinct modern liberal state. It is the outcome of a social process of more than 15 years, and not the result of any enlightened movement. However, the Montecristi Constitution contributes to the constitutional theory proposing new links between morality and law and between politics and law. Moreover, it creates new institutions that make possible the coexistence of living beings. Thus, the constitutional recognition of the legal personhood of nature is both a dialogue and a disruption with the philosophical and theoretical frameworks on which the State-society-nature relationship has been traditionally established. Since the second half of the 20th century, there have been two great waves of constitutional reform related to Nature. The first destroys the concept of ‘‘nature’’ and entronates ‘‘the environment’’ in order to make the management of natural resources possible. The second one revives from the ashes the concept of ‘‘nature’’ and gives it legal personhood, to make the world of life possible. The recognition of nature as a rights holder is based on a societal project that advocates a "bio-republicanism", which rescues the integral, holistic and communitarian views as axes to transform society. As a historical aspiration, this recognition has the virtue of reformulating the moral and legal parameters on which the relationship between State, society and nature is established.