Ecuador Constitutional Court Case: La Isla Pig Farm in Mera Canton

Summary

In May 2018, the Constitutional Court of Ecuador ruled that a pig farm in Mera Canton violated rights of nature by causing environmental damage to the Alpayacu river. The case regarded non-compliance with an appeal court ruling by the Provincial Court of Justice of Pastaza.

Background
The first instance was a protection action filed by spouses Iván Marcelo Garzón and Mónica Ivonne Freire Ortizin—owners of “La Isla Pig Farm”—against the Municipal Government of Mera Canton, alleging a violation of the right to due process and the right to property.

The owners of the farm received an official letter on 29 January 2009 from the Mayor of Mera Canton which informed them they had 8 days to evacuate all pigs from their farm. The decision was based on the fact that the owners had not obtained an environmental license and did not have an operating permit. The local authorities also claimed that the farm generated environmental damage to the Alpayacu river. Court documents show that the installation of the farm was contested by the Mayor of Mera Canton since as early as 2006.

Provincial Court Ruling
On 14 May 2009, the Provincial Court of Pastaza issued a judgement on the Protection Action (No. 042-2009), ruling in favor of the municipal government and dismissing the action brought by the owners of the farm.

“Our Political Constitution of Ecuador wisely establishes that our country is a State of Constitutional rights—rights that extend not only to human beings but also to nature. It must be understood that all of us who dwell upon the face of the earth are part of a greater whole, and that the collective interest must take precedence over any private interest—even when accepting this principle proves difficult, as is the case in the matter currently before us.” – Provincial Court of Justice (CC Ruling, pg. 3)

The court conducted a direct inspection of La Isla Farm. It determined that the installation of a large-scale pig farm—an operation involving extensive production that exerts a significant environmental impact on the surrounding area—was made in an unsuitable location.

The court ordered comprehensive reparations, including the government of Mera Canton to investigate into the officials responsible for granting permits and environmental licenses, to establish who, through action or omission, would have allowed La Isla Farm to be installed and operated. It ordered the evacuation of animals from the farm; however, on the basis of equity, it gave the farm a period of three months to remove the pigs.

After three months, the sentence’s compliance was requested. However, during that period, the owners sold the pig farm to individuals unrelated to the litigation—against whom the sentence could not have any effect because doing so would infringe upon the rights of third parties. They claimed they were forced to sell because the court issued an “unlawful ruling that has inflicted enormous—including financial—harm.”

Since the court could not enforce the sentence with the new owners, the case was sent to the Constitutional Court to determine whether the sentence was non-compliant and impossible to execute.

Constitutional Ruling (Case No. 0047-09)
The case was admitted in April 2010. In 2018, the Constitutional Court determined that the installation and operation of a pig farm, in a sector where important rivers converge, violated the right to live in a safe and healthy environment, to live in harmony with nature, and the rights of nature enshrined in the Constitution (pg. 17-18).

For this specific case, it ruled that it is essential to consider that article 72 of the Constitution establishes the right of nature to restoration, which is independent of the right of the affected persons to receive corresponding compensation. That is, in the face of any event that generates environmental damage, nature has the right to be fully restored, without prejudice.

The Court stated that “given the evident damage to the Alpayacu River ecosystem,” it was “struck by the fact that the Autonomous Decentralized Government of Mera Canton has not taken immediate, effective, timely and agile actions so that the pig farm is not installed, since from its inception it constituted a serious threat to the ecosystem.” (pg. 20)

Impact Statement

At the time of the case, the facilities of La Isla Farm no longer existed, as the new owners voluntarily decided to vacate the area. Since there were no longer any pig facilities, the Constitutional Court determined that the judgment issued by the provincial court in May 2009 was unenforceable, and the reparation measures no longer able to be executed.