Toward eco-justice for all - Environmental Harm: An Eco-justice Perspective - page 141

as 'superior responsibility' and 'strict liability' are meant to convey the
fact that regardless of motivation, rationale or excuse, someone should
always be held responsible for environmental harm and/or harm to
animals - the issue is one of 'consequence of ' rather than 'caused
by' (see Williams, 1996: 26). In the latter, attention turns to general
protections that ought to be afforded to that which cannot protect
itself. This is projected via the language of 'rights' (which in itself is
not unproblematic - see for example, Anderson, 2004; Sollund, 2012a).
For instance, an Earth Jurisprudence is rapidly gaining traction
among many of those with an interest in ecological sustainability and
environmental justice (Cullinan, 2003). A growing part of this is the
push for the acceptance of 'ecocide' as a bona fide crime (Higgins,
2012). These concerns are also finding their way into institutionalised
statements and protections. For example, in 2008 the people of Ecuador
voted by a 63 per cent majority for a new Constitution, the first in
the world to comprehensively recognise ecosystem rights and nature
rights (Walters, 2011).
Article 71 provides:
Nature or Pachamama, where life is reproduced and exists,
has the right to exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital
cycles, structure, functions and its processes in evolution.
Every person, people, community or nationality, will be
able to demand the recognition of rights for nature before
the public organisms.
Progressive developments such as these are premised on the idea of Earth
stewardship. Paradigms of trusteeship, of stewardship, are very different
to those based upon private property conceptions of ownership (see
Chapter Three). As Walters (2011: 266) points out, 'Ownership implies
that you can use land but don't have responsibility to others to care for
it.' The Earth is seen to be 'held in trust', and it is humans who have
the responsibility to provide the requisite stewardship.
Meanwhile, in the United States the Animal Legal Defense Fund
argues that animals are sentient beings and entitled to basic legal rights
(Animal Legal Defense Fund, 2007). In petitioning the US Congress,
the ALDF states that Congress should pass legislation in support of the
following basic rights for animals:
• the right of animals to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect
and abuse