Did you know that your version of Internet Explorer is out of date?
To get the best possible experience using our website we recommend downloading one of the browsers below.

Internet Explorer 10, Firefox, Chrome, or Safari.

New Zealand Grants Rights of Personhood to Whanganui River

Like us on Facebook:
The current article you are reading does not reflect the views of the current editors and contributors of the new Ecorazzi

Ever wish people took the needs of nature as seriously as they took the needs of a living breathing person? In a landmark case in New Zealand, such an event has just happened.

New Zealand made history only days ago by giving the rights of a person to the Whanganui River. Under the preliminary agreement, that means the river will be considered a legal entity and have a legal voice. While the river can’t exactly celebrate the win, we’re sure the Whanganui River iwi, an indigenous community who fought for the rights of the river and who will now have a legal say on its behalf, are ecstatic.

Obviously, a river can’t speak, so, much like a child (or Britney Spears) or a company, the Whanganui will have the iwi and government officials serve legal custodians who will speak up for its best interests.

Christopher Finlayson, New Zealand’s Minister for Treaty for Waitangi Negotiations, said about the decision, “Today’s agreement which recognises the status of the river as Te Awa Tupua (an integrated, living whole) and the inextricable relationship of iwi with the river is a major step towards the resolution of the historical grievances of Whanganui iwi and is important nationally.

“Whanganui Iwi also recognise the value others place on the river and wanted to ensure that all stakeholders and the river community as a whole are actively engaged in developing the long-term future of the river and ensuring its wellbeing.”

We are very curious what this new status will mean for the longterm care of the Whanganui. And, what it will mean for forests, animals, marshes and oceans. If a river can be given the legal status of personhood, why not a tree or a bird? Will this give the river a course of action against polluters? Treehugger reports that Ecuador did the same thing with its forests, lakes, and waterways in 2008 to protect them so it’s not the first time something like this has happened in the world. We’ll have to see how this all shakes out, and what it means for the rest of New Zealand.

Via Treehugger

Like us on Facebook:
  • guest

    So who speaks for the river or does it have multiple conflicting voices???

  • Me

    They mean well, but this is the kind of misguided, poorly-thought out nonsense that constantly leads environmental nuts astray. It demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding for how humanistic societies operate and what rights mean to us.

  • Fox Haven

    I don’t know why anyone fighting for the environment would see this as a negative. In the US, we recognize corporations as having personhood – this is much like that. Honestly, I really don’t see a difference.

Why we SHOULDN’T genetically ‘disenhance’ animals

Creating bandaid “solutions” to ethical problems we’ve created doesn’t address the issue at hand

What you can do if live exports disturb you

The outcry should go further than importation and should be directed at the fact that the animals in question were on their way to slaughter in the first place.

Wicked Good Opportunity

Bloomberg reports that the introduction of “vegan ranges” is at least partially responsible for improving Tesco’s finances.