Ecuador Constitutional Court Case: mangroves and shrimp farms in the El Verdum Commune

Summary

On March 10, 2012, the First Civil and Commercial Chamber of the Provincial Court of Manabí issued a ruling in a case concerning the displacement of the El Verdum community to make way for a shrimp farm. The Court determined that the community’s collective rights had been violated, but that there had been no violation of the rights of nature, despite the case involving mangrove ecosystems central to the community’s livelihoods. The Court ordered the businessman to return 20% of the disputed land to the community. However, enforcement has remained unresolved, and the case ultimately proceeded to the Constitutional Court.

Ecuador is the world’s largest shrimp producer, generating about 50% of the global market and more than one billion dollars annually. Expansion of shrimp aquaculture has significantly impacted mangrove ecosystems, reducing national mangrove cover from 362,000 hectares to about 108,000. In this case, businessman Jefferson Antonio Loor Moreira purchased 137 hectares in the Chone River estuary, Manabí province—a mangrove ecosystem where 70 families (forming the El Verdum commune) with ancestral ties to the land depended on mangrove resources for food and livelihoods.

Loor declared the families “invaders” and demanded they vacate the land. The commune requested an investigation by the Manabí government, which confirmed their ancestral rights, and ordered the businessman to grant access back to the Collective. The businessman refused to comply, leading to a court case in 2012.

In the first instance, the Court determined there were no violations of collective rights or rights of nature, citing the legality of Loor’s purchase and a lack of demonstrated ecological harm. On appeal, however, the Provincial Court of Manabí recognized that the community’s displacement constituted a violation of collective rights. The Court emphasized the importance of restoring the mangrove ecosystem for the community’s subsistence and buen vivir and ordered Loor to grant the commune 20% of the land. Loor refused and filed an extraordinary protection action before the Constitutional Court.

On March 11, 2015, the Constitutional Court of Ecuador reaffirmed that under the 2008 Constitution, nature is recognized as a subject of rights, with guarantees for conservation. Specifically, Article 406 of the Constitution establishes that fragile and threatened ecosystems, including mangroves, are the collective patrimony of the Ecuadorian State and subject to State regulation. Because of this, ownership and use rights are limited and require permits granted by the Ministry of Environment. The Court found that Loor had obtained the requisite permits from the Ministry and therefore his legal security was guaranteed by the Constitution.

In its reasoning, the Court struck a balance between the constitutional recognition of nature’s rights and the principle of legal certainty. While it reaffirmed that nature possesses enforceable rights, it held that in this case, enforcement of those rights was constrained by the State’s sovereign authority over mangrove ecosystems. Accordingly, the Court ruled in favor of Loor, and returned the case to the Provincial Court for a new resolution consistent with its findings.

Impact Statement

The Court affirmed Loor’s property rights, but held its order for Loor to restore 20% of the land to the commune. Authorities have not enforced the restitution order, and community members report ongoing intimidation and threats. The case highlights the complex interaction in Ecuadorian jurisprudence between the rights of nature, community rights, property rights and the State’s constitutional authority over natural resources, underscoring the challenges of balancing economic interests and ecological protection.

Involved Organizations