nature rights

The assistant secretary general of the U.S., Kanni Wignaraja, wants “nature” to go to court so that tribunals can set environmental policy for the world. From her “Nature Goes to Court,” published by the U.N. Development Programme (of which she is a regional director): Nature is taking the stand as courtrooms worldwide become battlegrounds for Earth’s rights. The rise in climate litigation shows how the environment can take centre stage as a plaintiff, demanding justice and accountability, benefiting us all. . . . Good grief. “Nature” would not be “going to court” or doing anything as viruses, geological features, flora and fauna would be utterly oblivious of the proceedings. What Wignaraja really means is that people who think like her Read More ›

More than 30 U.S. cities have adopted nature rights ordinances, mostly to prevent fracking. And now in the recent election, 57 percent of voters in Everett, Wash., granted rights to a geological feature, specifically, the Snohomish River watershed. From the initiative:

The Snohomish River Watershed possesses the rights to exist, regenerate, and flourish, which shall include the right to naturally recharge, the right to naturally flow, the right to water quality necessary to provide habitat for native plants and animals, the right to provide clean water, and the right to restoration. The Snohomish River Watershed shall also have the right to be free from activities.

This is anti-enterprise — and anti-human — since it waters down (pardon the pun) the crucial legal principle of rights to a ridiculous degree. Indeed, with a river granted rights, we re-dignify rights into a concept that thwarts, rather than protects, human freedom.

The “nature rights” project — and its ancillaries — keeps advancing, mostly ignored by those who could stop it in its tracks with legislation declaring that only humans and our associations and juridical entities have legal standing in courts or enforceable rights. Now, a “whale rights” project has commenced, pushed pro bono by a big international law firm, Simmons and Simmons. From the Legal Cheek story: These frameworks centre on the concept of a “legal person” — an entity acknowledged as having “standing” within the judicial system. Traditionally, this status has been reserved for humans, community organisations, and corporations. Granting this designation to whales represents a groundbreaking shift, acknowledging the value of non-human life and redefining how the law engages Read More ›

Our betters among the elites are increasingly embracing nature rights and its derivatives. Latest example: An editorial published by the World Economic Forum pushes “forest rights.” The Earth is burning and the fault is — ta-da! — capitalism! From, “Reimagining Capitalism — Giving Forests Legal Rights”: Capitalism, of course has, in many aspects, brought about incredible progress. Industrialization and globalization have propelled advances in life expectancy, education, and social welfare. But does this narrative still hold true? For the first time, GDP diverges from well-being indices in many nations. This exposes a system that not only engineers its own demise, but threatens humanity and the natural environment. Has this unnamed editorialist ever been to China? That anti-capitalist utopia has air Read More ›