The News That Didn't Make the News

A look at Project Censored 2010's 18th story,
Ecuador's Constitutional Rights of Nature...

Quick recap, Ecuador is located along the North West side of South America. It's population is approximately 13.2 million people and it's a Spanish speaking country.

The story of Ecuador's constitutional rights of nature outlines as followed...

• In September 2008, Ecuador became the first country in the world to declare constitutional rights of nature. These rights installed a new system of environmental protection on the country by redefining people's relationship with nature. The laws asserted that nature is not just an object but rather a rights-bearing entity that should be treated with parity under the law.

• Other countries are becoming interested in this constitution and beginning to draft plans of their own however it's not all working out as perfectly as planned. "I expect them to fight it, their bread and butter is based on being able to treat countries and ecosystems like cheap hotels. Multinational corporations are dependent on ravaging the planet in order to increase their bottom line" says Mari Margil, associate director of the Environmental Legal Defense Fund.

• A mining law introduced by the president of Ecuador, Correa, and backed by Canadian companies is proof that although the constitution looks good on paper, it really comes down to money and how it can be obtained. The President argues that allowing this extensive mining will bring "well being and relieve poverty" on his people which "overrules the rights of nature".

• Many are disappointed with the mining law that takes the "loopholes" in the rights-to-nature and "widens them" to get away with such extensive destruction. These indigenous leaders have filled a lawsuit deeming the project as unconstitutional yet as of now, nothing is being changed due to the loose wording of the constitution.
• The Los Angeles Times was the only US media outlet to cover the story. The published story trivialized the act by suggesting it sounded "like a stunt by the San Fransisco City Council" and that it seemed "crazy".
• Although there are struggles to ensure that the true meaning of the constitution is upheld, many believe that the nature laws could offer a path to an ecologically sustainable future and that all countries should be monitoring and learning from what is going on in Ecuador.

So I first threw the title of this story into a Google search and within .34 seconds had over 176,000 links appear in front of my face. Most of the links lead me to individuals blogs where they focused on topics such as nature, climate change, sustainable environments and different government bills and laws. Most of the sites I clicked around simply addressed the fact that Ecuador was passing this constitution and then either praised or dissed the idea and questioned if it was something all countries would see in the future. It was reassuring to see that individuals in the United States were aware of this story and pondering if the US could even instate such regulations and whether or not they would work.

I clicked on a link that brought me to Ecuador.com, the countries websites created by a group called "Ecuador Channel" along with a group called Paley Media. The website includes an article about the constitution reform and what it plans to say. It also says that the reform comes with mixed reactions but it gives people the opportunity to decide where they stand on the issue.

I next came across a blog called "Climate and Capitalism" that is an online journal focusing on capitalism, climate change, and the ecosocialist alternative that is published by Ian Angus. Ian wrote multiple books on the subject of climate change and previously hosted a blues music program called "Let the Good Times Roll" on CIUT-FM in Toronto. He states what the constitution actually says and how its being implemented and doesn't really throw his opinion into it, rather he allows readers to comment with their own thoughts.

Finally, I conducted a full search of all publications on Lexis Nexis and was surprised and glad to see 706 articles come up on the topic. I realize that not all of these articles covered the new constitution but the fact that it can be found at all is positive.

I then narrowed the search down to include only "major US and world publications" and the search was quickly narrowed down to three. Three newspapers, The New York Times, Korea Times and the Globe and Mail which is based in Canada. The New York Times article that was published Dec 14, 2008 is a bit skeptical about how the laws will actually be followed because of the poverty in Ecuador and also the fact that the scope of nature's rights is really unclear how it is written. "The text puts less emphasis on defending specific species than on the rights of ecosystems in large." The Times does say that this idea is a milestone for environmental organizations that seek to rewrite our treatment of nature. They also write that this constitution was passed in Ecuador by nearly 70 percent of voters.

The article in The Globe and Mail from Canada is extremely positive about the movement Ecuador has made. They acknowledge that it is the first country to have passed such laws and further explain that the new constitution gives many of the same rights to rivers, forests, plants and animals as it does to people. "People do not have to claim damage to themselves or their property in order to file a claim against those that harm the environment".

I was a little disappointed to find out that the article published in the Korea times didn't even have relevance to the topic at hand...