Summary
Beginning in 2003, citizens of the Canton of Santo Domingo de los Colorados in Ecuador complained to national government ministries about water, air, and soil contamination produced by a large-scale pork processing plant owned by the agroindustrial company PRONACA. After government administrative actions did not solve the problem, claimants filed a lawsuit for protective action in 2009. The plaintiffs requested a stoppage of 6 new biodigestor machines that PRONACA was installing to process the release of methane gas caused by intensive pig farming.
Jurisprudential Framing
While the plaintiffs noted the negative impacts on flora, fauna, and aquatic systems, the protective action did not invoke rights of nature. Rather, the plaintiffs argued that PRONACA’s actions violated their constitutional rights to health and a safe and clean environment. It was the judge who applied rights of nature in the case. The Judge considered Nature as one of the affected parties in the case, and looked at violations of the rights of nature, as established recently established in the new Ecuadorian constitution of 2008, as well as the human rights of health and enjoying a healthy environment.
Constitutional Court Ruling
The Constitutional Court heard the case in 2009. The court ruled against the proposed protections and the stoppage of the biodigestors. However, the court did rule that the case involved potential violations of the rights of nature that needed to be protected, invoking Articles 71-72 of the constitution. The court ordered the creation of a commission to audit and monitor the biodigestors to ensure that the rights of nature, citizens, and communities would be protected.
This ruling is significant in that the court acknowledged its right to invoke constitutional articles regarding Rights of Nature even when claimants did not specifically indicate such rights.
*Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas Province was created in October 2007 from territory previously in the province of Pichincha.
Related Initiatives
Suggested Citation:
Kauffman, Craig, Catherine Haas, Alex Putzer, Shrishtee Bajpai, Kelsey Leonard, Elizabeth Macpherson, Pamela Martin, Alessandro Pelizzon & Linda Sheehan. Eco Jurisprudence Monitor. V2. 2025. Distributed by the Eco Jurisprudence Monitor.https://ecojurisprudence.org/initiatives/biodigester-case/.
When using our data, please follow the FAIR and CARE Principles for data governance outlined in our Ethics Statement. We are doing our best to be correct in the information we provide, but if you notice any omission or inaccuracy, please report this to us immediately at info@ecojurisprudence.org so we can correct it.
Eco Jurisprudence Tracker is licensed under CC BY 4.0
