RIGHTS OF NATURE: What does it mean?

Rights of Nature is a transformative legal thinking that recognizes that ecosystems and species have the same intrinsic rights and protections that human beings and corporations enjoy. The philosophical thought behind the ‘Rights of Nature’ is that our ecosystem does not only exist for the benefit of human beings but also deserves to be protected and respected for its own sake. Further, it promotes the idea that human beings are interconnected with nature around them and ensuring the well-being of the natural world in turn supports the well-being of human beings.

The Ecuadorian Constitution was the first national constitution to recognize the Rights of Nature by granting legal standing to ecosystems and allowing citizens to sue on their behalf. Although the Rights of Nature have not yet been formally recognized in India's legal system, the Constitution of India provides for the protection of the environment as a duty of every citizen and the Supreme Court of India has issued several landmark judgments that prioritize the protection of the environment. Additionally, there are several laws in India that protect the environment, including the Wildlife Protection Act, the Forest Conservation Act, and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act among others. Finally, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) was established in 2010 to hear cases related to environmental protection and conservation.

Recently, I had the privilege to participate in a case study organised by Khoj International Artists’ Association, a New Delhi-based arts organization that conceived a mock hearing to petition the Union of India, Ministry of Environment and key ministrates in the areas of, Punjab, Haryana, and the Union Territory of Delhi, to impose a prohibition on stubble burning and monetary fines on a fictitious farmers union. The cornerstone of the petition was the request to include Rights of Nature as part of the Right to Life in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. I was one of three petitioners that included Khoj, artist Zuleikha Chaudhuri and myself as the youngest petitioner representing the youth of this country. The hearing included three practising lawyers, three subject expert witnesses, and three retired judges. In the final judgement as summarised by Khoj, the Bench recognised the urgency with which Rights of Nature needed to be upheld. However, the judgement acknowledged that the issue of stubble burning is a complex one and that a complete ban on the practice is not an equitable solution even as technological advancements in the field may provide us with answers in the future.