Opinion | Should nature get rights?

It is an idea about which has been discussed for a while: assigning rights to nature, so that, for example, it has the right not to be polluted. Master International Environmental Law Jessica den Outer and PhD student Constitutional and administrative law Julian Boer will discuss the following statement: Rights for nature must be anchored in the Dutch legal system.

Jessica is the Outer JDOJulian Boer is JB.

JDO: « As a lawyer, I find it extremely painful that nature in the Netherlands is in crisis, despite countless laws and rules. The pollinators disappear, waters are continuously poisoned, and natural objectives are getting further and further out of sight. That points to the failure of a legal system based on an outdated worldview. Men is especially a rule of nature, and is that man wispers wisp and that is a rule of nature, and that man wispers wisp and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule of the nature, and that is a rule of nature, and that is a rule. Legal persons arguing for economic interests, but rivers and other nature are hardly heard by the rights of nature. of nature not like one Silver Bullet For the current crisis, but as an important step. « 

JB: « That nature should be better protected is a pole above water. The allocation of rights to nature as a solution sounds sympathetic, but legislation should not only sound good – it also has to work. I have my reservations about that. Giving the right to a river to ‘flourish’ may sound attractive, but is difficult to do so as well as a legal right of law. duties with regard to nature, such as nature conservation laws and nitrogen rules, are already structurally violated, why would rights for rivers, forests or hills be better respected?

« We can better invest in the enforcement of the duties that are already stuck in the law, set sharper standards and dare to make hard but necessary political choices that really protect nature. Sitting still is not an option – Nor does experimenting. »

She finds: rights are not Silver Bullet, but an important step

JDO: « There is no doubt that there is a hurry. That we have to take action too. There are still many legal questions about nature rights. But that we cannot answer every question yet, is not an excuse for me. The right has been historically always reactive and is lagging behind social developments. You don’t find a new legal development, that bottom-up is suggested by citizens, and then have to take very seriously? We are already ahead of us all over the world. For example, forests in Ecuador win the devastating mining and the Whanganui River in New Zealand has a voice in decision-making through representatives. Rights to nature does not immediately solve everything, but is fairer. ”

JB: „Vanzelfsprekend juich ik ieder initiatief toe om de natuur te beschermen, maar ik vind juist wél dat de belangrijkste juridische vragen op voorhand moeten kunnen worden beantwoord. Dat de bossen in Ecuador het dankzij natuurrechten zouden winnen van de mijnbouw is te eenvoudig gesteld: het afgelopen decennium nam de ontbossing voor mijnbouw in de Ecuadoriaanse Amazone nu juist met 300 procent toe. U doet het recht tekort met de implicatie dat de natuur nu geen plek aan tafel Has the Environmental Act, for example, the intrinsic value of nature and citizens can already represent in politics, the social debate. « 

JDO: “Rights of nature do not have to get rid of existing protection, such as the one via the Natura 2000 system. On the contrary: they can strengthen it-through a framework for supervision, enforcement and participation of independent representatives of nature in decision-making. In addition, lawyers concluded in a report of the Wadden academy that did not in the right of law as a lawyer in nature in the lawyer’s academy in the lawyer in the lawyer in the lawyer in the law of the lawyer in the law of the lawyer in the lawyer in the lawyer in the laws of the law of lawyer in the laws of law, in the law of law. We actually see Ecuador a shift in legal thinking and are getting more and more things thanks to the rights of nature.

He finds: legislation should not only sound good, she must also work

« We also see such a trend in the Netherlands: after Eijsden-Margraten, the municipality of Groningen is now also investigating the Rights of Nature. The law is constantly developing. Women’s rights were once also set as ‘too abstract’. Now they are obvious. If you welcome every initiative for better nature conservation, why would you set up a threshold here? »

JB: “In the Netherlands, environmental organizations often win lawsuits without rights for nature – think of Urgenda and the nitrogen procedures. In addition, I do not believe that it is impossible to designate nature as a legal person. My care concerns the implementation and consequences after introduction. Do only have the right to live, or do the right to live, or also have the right? Burning only the right to flood? Nature is so bad, but instruments really add to our nature conservation law, and why would we not be listened to only promises and a symbolic boost.

To share

Mail the editors