A natureza como sujeito de direitos no sistema interamericano de direitos humanos

Abstract

The present work seeks to demonstrate the evolution of the protection of nature, from the first letters of civil and political rights, reaching the decisions of the Inter-American System of Human Rights, especially of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Court IDH), to verify if in the Jurisprudence more of the Inter-American System of Human Rights, Nature is considered a subject of rights. For this purpose, the jurisprudential analysis of 9 (nine) cases judged by the Inter-American Court from 2001 to 2018, related to traditional communities and environmental protection, was used. The methodology used was qualitative-quantitative, through a literature and document review, as well as an empirical study of the IDH Court jurisprudence. Initially, we sought to carry out an analysis of the ethics of Nature, thus contributing to it from an anthropocentric, biocentric and ecocentric perspective, and the points of contact between the various theories. Next, we began to study the evolution of constitutionalism in Latin America, with emphasis on the constitutions of Ecuador and Bolivia, placing Nature on another level by protecting it constitutionally and legally as a subject of law. When investigating the protection of the environment in the international scenario, more specifically in the Inter-American System of Human Rights, we analyzed Advisory Opinion nº 23/2017, since it establishes parameters for the System in environmental protection. We verified that, in a way, the protection of nature is also present in the decisions of the Inter-American Court, not by chance, the environmental preservation, even in a reflexive way, started to have shelter in the System, in the protection of the indigenous territories and of traditional communities. In view of the interrelation of these with tangible and intangible assets, to conclude that despite Advisory Opinion No. 23/2017 it was established that the natural path would be for Nature to recognize the status of subject of rights, the decisions do not conclude from this way, bringing it closer to an anthropocentric vision with socioenvironmental concerns.