Nature`S Rights - Paving The Way For Environmental Personhood

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Environmental Law

Published: 2026-08-23T20:38:36.575613+00:00

Updated: 2026-08-26T17:10:23.721+00:00

NATURE`S RIGHTS: PAVING THE WAY FOR

ENVIRONMENTAL PERSONHOOD

Shruthi. V, BA LLB, Vel Tech School of Law, Vel Tech University, Avadi, Chennai

ABSTRACT

This paper delves into the idea of designating legal personality to natural elements environmental personhood. The necessity to preserve environmental entities is arising day by day. To uphold environmental justice there is a need to repair the ecological life as it has been polluted more than before. This study suggests environmental personhood as one of the measures to uphold environmental justice. This paper sheds light on the origin & development of environmental personhood. The main aim of the paper is to analyze the fallacies faced in implementing this idea and to discuss the positive impact of this idea on the economy.

I. INTRODUCTION:

If the environment had the same legal right as a human being, would we continue to destroy its habitats, polluting it, and exploiting its resources- all this for our cause? In this way, giving trees and other natural elements legal personality is one great idea that became known. A legal personality is defined as “A person is any being whom the law regards as capable of rights and bound by legal duties” 1. Non-human entities like those that corporations are often considered as legal persons, just like corporations natural entities with personhood can also have representatives that can sue on their behalf. This paper delves into the idea of recognizing “nature as a person”. It discusses the origin and development of this idea throughout history and the barriers involved in implementing this idea.

This paper also emphasizes on economic aspects of recognizing nature as a person and understanding how this perspective influences resource management and sustainable development goals.

II. ORIGIN & DEVELOPMENT:

The present legal regime does not protect the elements of nature effectively. Because, it treats the environment as an object and property that human can use for their use. When nature considered as an object, the chance of getting it exploited is greater. This creates environmental injustice, as resources not equally protected. Here comes the concept of legal personhood to environmental entities. The research paper “Should Trees Have Standing? -Legal Rights towards natural objects" by Christopher Stone gave the idea of giving legal personality to nature Stone argues that natural elements need an aggrieved person to sue for them and also the compensation is given to the affected person instead of natural elements2. Justice William Douglas referred to this in the 1972 US Supreme Court case of Sierra Club v. Morton 3.

He advocated for natural elements to have a locus standi before the court of law for their protection and improvement. Even today, the principle laid in this case is used by much legislation in the world, which advocates for legal personhood for natural entities. 1 Legal rights and status of person, unborn child and environmental resources, july 30, 2021 available at https://blog. ipleaders. in/legal-rights-status-person-unborn-child-environmentalresources/#The_legal_status_of_a_person (visited on March 17, 2024) 2Stone (1972), ‘Should Trees Have Standing? – Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects’, Southern California Law Review, 45, pp. 450-501.

3 Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 (1972)

Ecuador: In 2007, Ecuador went through the Citizens Revolution. The Country`s indigenous groups along with the National Confederation of Indigenous nationalities of Ecuador proposed for incorporation of the concepts of Good Living and Mother Earth into their new constitution4. As a result of this,the 7th chapter of Ecuador`s new constitution titled "Rights of Nature" recognizes Mother Earth as a legal entity that has rights "to exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions and its processes in evolution”5. To ensure these rights any individual or group of individuals can petition on behalf of nature. Ecuador became the first country to recognize and include the Rights of Nature in its constitution. Bolivia: Similarly, in Bolivia, the indigenous group demanded to include the Rights of Nature in their constitution.

In 2010, the Bolivian government came out with the "Law of the Rights of Mother Earth". This law includes Ten Articles, Which grant seven specific rights to Mother Earth and her constituting life systems. Its law also recognizes Mother Earth as a "collective subject of public interest”6. This is to ensure the exercise and protection of the environment. The shift from an anthropocentric view to an ecocentric view started here. New Zealand: In New Zealand, the movement to give environmental personhood started by the tribal community. The Maori tribe considered the Whanganui River as their ancestor. They fought for recognition for more than 140 years. Finally, in 2014, the river recognized as a legal entity. 7 The status of the Whanganui River followed signaling the end of New Zealand's longestrunning litigation.

This meant that the law would now treat the harming of the river the same 4 Sanket khandelwal , Environmental Personhood: recent development and road ahead, april 24,2020 available at https://www. jurist. org/commentary/2020/04/sanket-khandelwal-environment-person/ (visited on March 17, 2024)

5 Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador (October 20, 2008), Chapter 7.

6 Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra, December 2010, article 5 defines as “For the purpose of protecting and enforcing its rights, Mother Earth takes on the character of collective public interest. Mother Earth and all its components, including human communities, are entitled to all the inherent rights recognized in this Law. The exercise of the rights of Mother Earth will take into account the specificities and particularities of its various components. The rights under this Act shall not limit the existence of other rights of Mother Earth”.

7 Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017, s 14.

way as harming the Maori tribe. To help enforce the river`s rights, two guardians were appointed8. India: In India, the progress relating to nature`s rights has mostly been brought about by judicial pronouncements without any major legislation regarding the rights of nature. In the case, T. N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India9. The apex court of the country emphasized the need to shift from the prevailing anthropocentric viewpoint to a broader perspective to ensure justice for the environment. While anthropocentrism prioritizes human interests, ecocentrism emphasizes the intrinsic worth of all living beings and the need to protect the natural world beyond mere utility. Whereas in Mohd. Salim v.

State of Uttarakhand,10 the Uttarakhand High Court ruled that two rivers, Gangotri and Yamunotri, are ‘living entities’ having the same status as a legal person with all corresponding rights, duties, and liabilities of a living person. Also, in Lalit Miglani v. State of Uttarakhand11 the same court ruled as “the Glaciers, including Gangotri & Yamunotri, rivers, streams, rivulets, lakes, air, meadows, dales, jungles, forests wetlands, grasslands, springs and waterfalls, are legal entity/legal person/juristic person/juridical person/moral person/artificial person having the status of a legal person, with all corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a living person, to protect and conserve them. ” Further, the above two rulings are challenged in the apex court and it ordered a provisional stay. In Karnail Singh v.

State of Haryana12 the Punjab and Haryana High Court gave legal status to animals for their welfare. The Court also declared every citizen as ‘locus parentis’ authorizing them to file a petition on behalf of the harmed animals. There is a confusion and difference in approaches of different quotes. Through various judicial precedents and judgements, Indian courts have recognised environmental entities as legal persons, and have granted them certain rights and duties. However, there exist no major legislations to govern such personalities.

8 Roy, Eleanor Ainge (2017-03-16). "New Zealand river granted same legal rights as human being". The

Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2019-07-10.

9 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, (1997) 2 SCC 267

10 Mohd. Salim v. State of Uttarakhand, Writ Petition (PIL) No.126 of 2014

11 Lalit Miglani v. State of Uttarakhand, Writ Petition (PIL) No.140 of 2015

12 Karnail Singh v. State of Haryana,2019 SCC OnLine P&H704

III. BARRIERS FACED:

The process of granting legal personality is not easy as there are many challenges involved. Firstly, The legal recognition for natural entities includes not only the right to sue but also the right to be sued13. Can a river be liable for damages caused to the property in flood? This became a fundamental question as nature`s actions are inevitable and unpredictable. Ultimately, such actions are inevitable. The possible measures we can take are, to improve our resource management and take necessary precautionary measures to tackle the difficulties during natural disasters. For example, executing strong methods to predict natural disasters. minimizing construction of buildings and urbanization in flood-prone areas such as Chennai for the protection of both human and environmental interests. Secondly, the issue is who can afford to bring up the case.

In Ecuador, there is a case brought to the court regarding road development in the riverbed causing pollution to the river. Therefore, the local community went to the court for reprisal. Here the court ruled in favor of the environment i. e. the rights of environment. The court asked the developers to remediate the damage caused to the river. The local community along with NGOs has to go back to court multiple times for the enforcement of remediation. Here, the government can introduce statutory bodies with special regard to the environment such as environmental tribunals like the National Green Tribunal for the speedy disposal of cases ensuring that the affected communities have access to justice without financial burden. Thirdly, the territorial limit of the court is questionable. The rivers may flow across borders of nation and state.

In a landmark judgment, the Uttarakhand High Court held that the Ganges & Yamuna rivers as a legal entity. However, the problem here is that the rivers flow across borders. It exceeds the judicial limit of the Uttarakhand High Court. The validity of the judgment is being questioned. 14 This paper suggests that it will be better if legislation steps in and enacts some special laws related to this to avoid conflict between other states. Also enhancing intrastate cooperation for improving nature can be an effective solution here. For challenges between nations, entering into treaties specifically related to transboundary rivers can be helpful.

13 Pilot, Otto (2021-05-28). "Should Nature Have Rights?". One. Retrieved 2021-11-16. Climate

14 Mohd. Salim v. State of Uttarakhand, Writ Petition (PIL) No.126 of 2014

IV. POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE ECONOMY:

Let`s understand how granting legal personality to natural entities can positively affect the economy. Granting legal personhood to nature means that it can sue just like a legal person. Through this action, the companies and persons will be more conscious about the impact of their actions on the environment. Business organizations are forced to adopt more efficient waste management practices to ensure a clean environment and minimize pollution. This leads to improved waste management and recycling processes. Ultimately, this helps to reduce costs for managing waste in business organizations and government. In addition, granting legal personhood to natural entities insists on the need to save resources for future generations. It becomes essential to use resources sustainably. The corporates focus on reusing the materials to extend their lifespan.

Reducing, Reusing, and Recycling are given much more importance. It reduces production costs and waste disposal costs which positively benefits the economy by reducing the need for raw materials. By adopting legal personhood, resource exploitation is reduced and they are saved for future consumption. By this, we can ensure the sustainability of resources which in turn positively affects the economy. sustainable techniques such as promoting the use of renewable energy resources, and introducing green technologies can develop the economy. It promotes ecotourism and revenue management. it increases the income local community through activities like tours, safaris, and adventure sports which benefits the economy.

V. CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, the journey towards granting legal personality to natural entities i. e. environmental personhood has seen a profound change and progress over the time. Giving environmental entities legal personhood is a challenge to our fixed ideas and legal rights and duties. From its modest beginnings in Christopher Stone's pioneering work to recent constitutional amendments and judicial verdicts in nations like Ecuador, Bolivia, New Zealand, and India, the concept has reshaped our view of seeing the natural world. Through environmental personhood, there is a significant shift towards a more comprehensive and sustainable approach to environmental protection. Despite having its advantages, it faces some practical and legal changes including concerns about liability, accountability, and accessibility to justice.

By embracing innovative legal frameworks, establishing specialized judicial bodies, and fostering international collaboration, societies can surmount these challenges and forge a

path towards a more equitable and sustainable future. By promoting improved waste management, resource conservation, and eco-tourism, environmental personhood offers tangible economic benefits while safeguarding our planet's precious ecosystems. By embracing this paradigm shift and addressing its associated challenges, we can strive towards a future where the rights of nature, are respected and protected for generations to come. So next time you meet an ant, a tree, or a river, try seeing someone instead of something. Maybe one day, our legal system will consider that non-human entity a person too. After all, our survival depends on them, and their survival depends on us.