ALL ROADS LEAD TO… THE RIGHTS OF NATURE

By Alberto Acosta [1], Enrique Viale [2][3]

“Only with the passage of time and the pressure of facts – which are even more persistent than the law – will Nature obtain, first in doctrine, then in jurisprudence, and finally in legislation, the legal status that rightfully belongs to her and that will allow her to fully assert the rights inherent to her.”
– Godofredo Stutzin, Chilean jurist (1984)

Image: AI-generated with DALL·E (OpenAI) – License: CC BY 4.0

The Milliarium Aureum, a monument built in 20 BC by Emperor Augustus in the Forum of Ancient Rome, marked the starting point of all Roman roads and emphasized the centrality of the capital. From Rome, the empire’s main roads extended outward and returned. Today, paraphrasing the saying “all roads lead to Rome,” we can say that all roads lead to the Rights of Nature – both as a destination and a starting point. And this is becoming reality in increasingly diverse ways and places, driven by the pressure of facts.

Recognizing that the law is a field of ongoing struggle, we must acknowledge how difficult it has been to secure environmental rights that enable humans to live in dignity. The relationship between jurisprudence and Nature has always been complex.

To bring about radical change, we must recognize that the existing legal framework – anthropocentric at its core – has its limits. It has been centered on establishing rights that subjugate Nature. In the clash between property rights – whether driven by privatization or tempered by public or communal interests – Mother Earth has been treated as an object of appropriation. As an object. It’s a long and tragic history.

The debate over whether non-human beings can possess rights takes place within this history. Between the 13th and 17th centuries, animals – especially pigs that killed or ate children – were sometimes tried in court, on the belief that they had a trace of a soul…

Today, we are witnessing much more far-reaching developments. We are called to reconnect with Nature, even to recognize her as the origin of all rights. It’s a complex transition – from environmental rights derived from human rights to Rights of Nature. These are not contradictory, but complementary and mutually reinforcing rights. And this shift is typically driven by citizen action, by diverse social movements.

From “Nature as Object” to “Nature as Subject”

Recognizing Nature as a rights-bearing subject proposes a new way of relating to Nature and its components. It demands a shift from an anthropocentric paradigm to a socio-biocentric one. This new civilizational paradigm abandons the view of Nature as a resource basket or waste repository.

Acknowledging Nature’s rights does not mean it must remain untouched. It calls for full respect for its existence and the regeneration of its vital cycles, structure, functions, and evolutionary processes – that is, for the defense of life systems. Nature is no longer seen as a dominion to be conquered or merely an economic resource.

The goal is to construct a society based on harmony – between humans and non-humans, among humans themselves, and across humanity. This vision – long present in Indigenous worldviews – is not utopian or naïve. It does not mean returning to the Stone Age. It recognizes that many ancient civilizations collapsed because they destroyed their ecosystems – and that this awareness can help us avoid repeating their mistakes.

Hence, it is not strange that we seek laws and jurisprudence that protect what sustains us: Mother Earth, Pacha Mama. It is telling that legal discourse begins to shift as Rights of Nature are integrated – for example, by including biological concepts like “life cycles” in national and international law.

Multiple Pathways to the Rights of Nature

This debate is growing stronger worldwide. It entered the international political agenda thanks to Ecuador’s 2008 Constitution, adopted by popular vote. This success was driven by active civic participation. Its roots lie deep in Indigenous worldviews – even if invisible to some. For them, Pacha Mama is their Mother – not a metaphor.

In Ecuador’s constituent process, a kind of legal mestizaje emerged: a respectful, active dialogue between knowledge systems that unified Indigenous and non-Indigenous struggles.

These Indigenous cosmovisions, diverse and rich, resonate with legal scholars who had long advocated extending rights to Nature. There are many precedents. What matters is that from many directions, we are moving toward the Rights of Nature – facing ecological destruction and proposing dignified alternatives.

Dozens of court cases worldwide now affirm these rights. Examples:

• Ecuador: multiple rulings upholding Nature’s rights.
• Colombia: Atrato River (2017) and Amazon (2018) granted rights, with joint state and community responsibility under biocultural rights.
• Panama: 2022 law recognizing Nature’s rights.
• Argentina: legal and citizen movements push for constitutional change.
• Chile: 2022 constitutional draft recognized Nature’s rights but failed in referendum.
• Spain: Mar Menor Lagoon gained legal personhood.
• Germany: Bavaria advancing constitutional recognition (Art. 101); 2024 Erfurt rulings upheld Nature’s rights, including in diesel emissions cases.
• New Zealand: Whanganui River granted legal personhood in 2012, rooted in Māori principles.
• India: Ganges and Yamuna rivers granted rights in 2017.
• USA: Lake Erie recognized as a rights-holder by 2019 citizen vote; further initiatives ongoing.

Towards a Copernican Shift

Recognizing Nature as a subject of rights represents a Copernican shift, akin to what Kant proposed in philosophy. We must accept that humans are not outside of Nature – we are Nature – and no species is superior. Nature gives us the right to exist.

This reawakens an ethic of life. We must transform anthropocentric societies from their roots.

We need a world re-enchanted around life, through dialogue and reconnection – between humans and with Nature as a whole. Until that shift happens, the future will be increasingly difficult.

Recognizing Nature’s rights obliges us to transition to biocentric practices. No more unrestrained exploitation – only ecologically sustainable use is permissible. Human laws must align with the laws of Nature. Legal recognition is not enough – real-world enforcement depends on material conditions. These rights must be multi-layered and interdisciplinary.

This understanding implies deep change in law, economy, society, politics – and above all, culture. All life forms have intrinsic value and the right to flourish. Humans can recognize these values, but they are not derived from us – they are inherent to life.

Just as we reject treating humans as commodities, we must reject commodifying Nature. These paradigms call us to move beyond market logic and central planning – to live in harmony with Nature, preserving its cycles, energy flows, and biodiversity. Nature is the center – and it matters for its own sake, not just for its utility.

Without the Rights of Nature, Freedom Is an Illusion

Nature is the foundation of our existence – and of our rights, including freedom. Individual and collective freedom can only be exercised within the framework of the Rights of Nature.

If we care about future generations, we must realize: their freedom depends on respecting Nature. As Klaus Bosselmann said: “Without the Rights of Nature, freedom is an illusion.”

We must dismantle patriarchal and colonial structures that generate multiple violences. The ecological and colonial debts must be acknowledged – rich nations owe this to exploited peoples and lands. The global economic system and its destructive instruments, like external debt, must change.

There will be setbacks – as with all human rights. But we must not lose hope. Not blind optimism, but the certainty that what we do matters, no matter the result.

In this loving reconnection with Mother Earth, we count on her resilience. She is truly our Mother. But if we don’t make peace with her, there will be no peace for us – because the Earth is rebelling.

Let us close with the words of Argentine filmmaker Fernando “Pino” Solanas, spoken in 2015 in Paris at the International Rights of Nature Tribunal:

“Perhaps there is no greater cause, since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, than to fight for the Rights of Nature.”

And this is the cause that calls us – from the four directions of the Earth.

[1] Ecuadorian economist. President of the Constituent Assembly (2007–2008). Presidential candidate for the Republic of Ecuador representing the Plurinational Unity of the Left (2012–2013). Comrade in the struggles of social movements. University lecturer. Author of several books.

[2] Argentine lawyer. Founder and president of the Argentine Association of Environmental Lawyers. He is the author of several books and scholarly articles. He works as an environmental consultant and communicator on radio, streaming platforms, and in print media.

[3] Both are co-authors of the book Nature Does Have Rights – Even If Some Don’t Believe It, Editorial Siglo XXI, Argentina (2024). Judges at the International Rights of Nature Tribunal. Members of the Eco-Social and Intercultural Pact of the South.

Note: This text was originally published in Italian in the magazine DECRESCITA and in Spanish in Línea de Fuego.