Systemic Theory and the Rights of Nature: Judgment n.º 22-18-IN/21

This paper shows a vision of the rights of nature from the postulates of the systemic theory, which provides parameters that must be taken at the time of analyze the article 71 of the Constitution of the Republic. The judgmentn.º 22-18-IN/21 is an important precedent in the protection of the rights...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Guerrero Bustillos, Katherin Paola
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2024
País:Ecuador
Institución:Universidad Andina Simón Bolivar
Repositorio:Revista FORO: REVISTA DE DERECHO
Idioma:español
OAI Identifier:oai:revistas.uasb.edu.ec:article/4311
Acceso en línea:https://revistas.uasb.edu.ec/index.php/foro/article/view/4311
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:sistémica
derechos
naturaleza
manglares
autopoiesis
funciones
ambiente
vida
systemic
rights
nature
mangroves
functions
environment
life
Descripción
Sumario:This paper shows a vision of the rights of nature from the postulates of the systemic theory, which provides parameters that must be taken at the time of analyze the article 71 of the Constitution of the Republic. The judgmentn.º 22-18-IN/21 is an important precedent in the protection of the rights of Nature, not only for the recognition of these to a specifc ecosystem, but also for the application of a theory that allows understanding the scope of the constitutional norm and its relevance for the protection of an ecosystem, in this case, the mangrove. For the development of this work, a qualitative methodology was applied through the search for information in national and international bibliographic, legal and jurisprudential sources. The result achieved consists in the identifcation of concepts that allow an in-depth analysis of the scope of the rights of nature and their application in specifc cases. Consequently, the judgment n.º 22-18-IN/21 is a reference for the protection of the rights of nature, setting standards that must be observed in a decision, and the Constitutional Court and the Ordinary Justice have considered in subsequent judgments.