Peru

On March 15, 2024, the Mixed Court of Nauta within the Supreme Court of Justice of Loreto delivered a historic ruling in Resolución Número 14, Expediente 00010-2022-0-1901-JM-CI-01. This decision, a significant milestone in Peruvian constitutional law, grants legal subjectivity to the Marañón River, recognizing it as a legal entity with enforceable rights. The lawsuit was brought by Huaynakana Kamatahuara Kana, a women’s association from the Kukama indigenous community, who sought legal recognition for the intrinsic rights of the river. The court further named the Peruvian state, the regional government of Loreto, and indigenous organizations as the river’s legal guardians.

The Marañón is Peru’s second-longest river and a major headwater of the Amazon, vital to the lives and culture of many indigenous groups, including the Kukama. For the Kukama, the river is sacred, representing spiritual beliefs and cultural identity. However, the river faces severe environmental threats due to oil spills from the Oleducto Nor Peruano pipeline, which has caused extensive contamination since its installation in 1978. Oil spills in 2014 and 2016 have disrupted the river’s ecosystem, threatening local indigenous communities dependent on its resources.

In September 2021, Huaynakana Kamatahuara Kana filed a writ of amparo under Article 200(2) of the Peruvian Constitution against state actors, including Petroperú and the Ministry of the Environment. The petition aimed to recognize the Marañón River and its tributaries as legal entities with rights. The defendants argued that recognizing nature’s rights would violate the anthropocentric foundation of Peru’s legal system, which prioritizes human needs. Nevertheless, the court rejected this argument and adopted an ecocentric legal perspective rooted in international environmental principles.

The court acknowledged that while the Peruvian Constitution does not directly recognize nature’s legal rights, international legal frameworks such as those endorsed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) support a right to a healthy environment. Drawing on the precautionary principle—mandating preventative action in environmental matters even without full scientific certainty—the court ruled that the river’s environmental degradation impeded local indigenous communities’ constitutional right to a healthy environment.

The court granted the Marañón River a range of legal rights, including the right to remain free of pollution, the right to maintain its natural ecological cycles, and the right to restoration and conservation. The decision also established that the Peruvian state and indigenous groups would act as legal representatives and guardians of the river to ensure its protection and restoration.

This ruling reflects a broader international trend recognizing the legal personhood of natural entities, such as rivers. Similar decisions have been made in Colombia, New Zealand, and Canada, where sacred rivers have also been granted legal rights. Indigenous perspectives, which view the environment as sacred and interconnected with human rights, are key drivers of this movement.

By integrating ecocentric principles into legal interpretations, this decision challenges traditional anthropocentric legal systems. It highlights how combining human rights with environmental ethics can reshape constitutional law and governance, setting a global precedent for addressing climate change and environmental harm.

The decision marks a transformative moment in legal systems by recognizing the intrinsic value of ecosystems, strengthening the intersection of environmental protection and human rights. The recognition of the Marañón River’s rights could influence future legal reforms worldwide, emphasizing ecological sustainability and environmental justice.