A legal analysis of the rights of nature in the context of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
Clicks: 1
ID: 285309
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #2,863 of 3,757 articles by views in Malay Journal
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 3,757 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Under Article II Sec 16 of the 1987 Constitution, the State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature. This stipulation in the Constitution is geared towards protecting the environment for the reason of considering the welfare of the present and future generations. While the Constitution actively upholds the duty to protect the environment, it does not however recognize that the environment is needed to have a voice to protect itself against further damage brought upon by human activities.The rights of nature legal concept was first introduced in Ecuador in 2008 wherein the country had granted a legal recognition to nature to evolve, flourish and exist. Several countries including Bolivia, New Zealand, and other municipalities in the United States have followed. The main purpose of the rights of nature legal concept is to give/has given legal rights to protect itself against impending damage. This thesis aims to study on whether the rights of nature legal concept allows for recognition in the context of the 1987 Constitution.The authors through the course of their research compared the differences between the current environment laws in the Philippines particularly the Writ of Kalikasan and the rights of nature legal concept being practiced by other countries in the world. The authors have found out that the Constitution does not allow for recognition of the rights of nature and therefore there is a need for an enabling law for the rights of nature to be recognized. The outcome of this thesis is a need for a proposal for the rights of nature legal concept to be recognized in the environmental laws currently present in our country. This new concept would be helpful to promote not only the need of humans to a healthy environment but also to stress the importance of protecting the environment for the reason that its rights should be protected in accordance to maintenance of its life cycles and evolutionary processes. The need of the environment to have a voice in the legal system in the Philippines shall be upheld.
| Reference Key |
persistent_1760655231_68f1777fca760
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Quitain, Ralph Lorenz L. |
| Journal | Malay Journal |
| Year | 2014 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.