To Conserve and to Protect: Observations and Insights on the Writ of Kalikasan in the Philippines and the Judicial Application of the Precautionary Principle in Brazil (original) (raw)
Related papers
The two terms ‘Ecological justice’ and ‘Environmental Justice’ may appear to be often conflicting, since both gives the impression that one and the same issue in environmental law and justice is the subject of debates. However, there is a need to differentiate between the human environment, which include built up areas, towns, cities, population centres, and the natural environment that includes biodiversity, ecosystems, and ecosystem goods and services. So no doubt the term ‘Ecojustice’ may be more fitting and less confusing when discussing the association of justice with the Rights of Nature or the Rights of Ecosystems Essentially, this type of justice is mainly ecocentric/biocentric, as opposed to the purely anthropocentric nature of human-centred Environmental Justice.
Under the current systems of law that still exist in almost every country of the world, nature (ecosystems) continues to be considered as property, a treatment which confers upon the owner the right to utilize, harm or destroy individuals, groups of individuals or components of natural systems within his property. However, the concept of the 'rights of nature,' recognizes that ecosystems and natural communities are not merely property that can be owned and disposed of, but entities with independent rights to exist and flourish, not only for their own benefits but for that of humanity as a whole as well. Laws recognizing the rights of nature would thus change the status of natural communities and ecosystems to being recognized as rights-bearing entities with rights that can be enforced by law. Before there could be any discussion of Ecojustice, whether nature has any rights that need to be acceptable or accepted has to be established, and even our understanding or lack of it, of what nature actually is has to be resolved.
The Unresolved Issues 3. Ecological Democracy-Environmental Democracy Ecological Democracy When compared with environmental democracy, ecological democracy tends to set more demanding normative standards, both in terms of environmental protection, 'which should be adequate for human, non-human, and future generations well-being,' as well as democratic inclusion. However, the two concepts do not define any clear-cut distinction, each representing an ideal type, with room for intermediate or hybrid alternatives, or combination of the two for effectiveness. A number of discussions on ecological democracy give greater prominence to the state (Eckersley, 2004), while others emphasise the transformative potential of civil society and discourse (Dryzek, 2000), even though both maintain an ecocentric perspective. Earlier, the views of Morrison (1995) and Faber (1998) on ecological democracy, however, envisage the transformation of industrial capitalism from an anthropocentric perspective to an ecocentric one. What is interesting to note is a statement from Guatari (2000): Ecology must stop being associated with the image of a small nature-loving minority. Ecology in my sense questions the whole of subjectivity and capitalistic power formations.
CONCEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Banaras Law Journal, 2006
This article basically tries to understand the concept of " Environmental Jusice" and explains its application in the world largest industrial disaster - the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster litigation and its outcome. This study demonstrate that it has been extreemly difficult to get environmental justice by the poor victims of the Bhopal industrial disaster to get justice against a powerful multinational corporation- the Union Carbide Corporation. This article also demonstrate the inadequacy of the Indian domestic laws as well as the international law to provide effective legal forum and procedure to protect the human rights of the thousands of the victims of a mass industrial disaster. It also shows that there exist a close relationship between law and economics, a neglected area of research in India and elsewhere.
The Justice Claims Underpinning Ecological Economics
To establish justice foundations for an ecological economy, we need a theory of theories of justice, rather than another theory. This is because we need to align and inter-relate our disparate norms of just behaviour – those that now actually guide us – with what we can gather from science about our place in, disruption of and steering capacity toward planetary systems and boundaries. The challenge of ecological economics is not one that can be borne simply by those who adhere to one particular model of justice. It must be borne by all. Any individual theory or model of justice will seek to organize and rank justice claims so as to produce the maximum social aggregate of justice. In the wake of accumulating justice deficits after world wars and the Holocaust, post-Enlightenment (post-modern) conceptions of justice put into doubt whether any singular, totalizing theory of justice is possible given the failure of such theories in the past.4 Furthermore, we are confronted with the challenge of producing global collective action with respect to planetary systems out of overlapping and conflicting social affirmations of justice.