It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

River Granted the Same Legal Rights as a Human Being

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:23 AM
link   
I vaguely recall the same legal approach being used in South or Central America for something - a forest? a river?

Whatever. I like this idea. Makes sense to me. MUCH more sense than granting the rights of 'personhood' to corporations.


A River Was Just Granted the Same Legal Rights as a Human Being

In a world-first, New Zealand’s third largest river has just been granted the same legal rights as a human being.

The new legislation essentially combines Western legal precedent with Maori mysticism. According to the Maori —a tribe of the Whanganui in the North Island who has been fighting to assert their rights over the river since the 1870s —their efforts to protect the river stems from the deep spiritual connection of the tribe to nature.

...Given the river’s new status, this basically means that should someone abuse or harm the river, it will by law be recognized as an attack against the tribe.

“The reason we have taken this approach is because we consider the river an ancestor and always have. We have fought to find an approximation in law so that all others can understand that from our perspective treating the river as a living entity is the correct way to approach it, as in indivisible whole, instead of the traditional model for the last 100 years of treating it from a perspective of ownership and management,” Gerrard Albert, the lead negotiator for the Whanganui iwi tribe, told The Guardian.





posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   
Oh man, India seriously needed this for the Ganges! that damn river is...poop.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:48 AM
link   
I like the idea, technically there are a lot of things living in a river, The ecosystem should have some rights. we cannot keep pouring toxic chemicals in the rivers.

Oh wait! The government allows chemical companies to feed us all sorts of unnatural chemicals which we pee or poop out and they go into the sewers. They are often not removed in the processes to clean the sewer water. So we eat these things then we poop them out, we are all contributing to adding unnatural chemistry to the rivers.

We elect the government officials that hire the people to oversee this poisoning.

We believe these government agencies generally recognized as safe status even though they never personally test most of them to find if they are safe.

We look the other way when it negatively effects our lives, but make a big issue of it if it doesn't personally effect us, go to a different area and protest someone who is not supplying jobs to our personal area.

We also believe in evidence that is not applicable to what they are applying it too, the new Eco-friendly scam is actually Economically friendly, designed for us to buy new technology of which it's creation is more of a negative ecology factor than staying with coal fired power plants.

Twisted evidence is everywhere, someone benefits by twisting it and promoting the deception.

Giving the river human rights is a good thing, you can't buffalo a river either.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

Great...my car is used for locomotion as well. Can it be now considered a person? I'll then be able to really take on the 9 out 10 mechanics who don't look after her.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow


...Given the river’s new status, this basically means that should someone abuse or harm the river, it will by law be recognized as an attack against the tribe.

Sounds like the issue of "harm or abuse", i.e., 'pollution' is ongoing. Instead of punishing the polluters they hand the tribe a promise of nothing, nether do they go after the polluters, fine them or pass legislation to protect the 'river people' from the polluters.

In the end the polluters will keep on keeping on, except maybe now they will switch to pollute now during storms, at night, while the river people sleep.

Novel approach. In the states we call that stuff "treaties".



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: soficrow

Great...my car is used for locomotion as well. Can it be now considered a person? I'll then be able to really take on the 9 out 10 mechanics who don't look after her.


Lol, other people have been 'violating' your cars rights, have they? You know what to do, call the BBB, oh never mind, call the police, oh, never mind. File suit, oh never mind, picket the establishment, oh never mind...

hmmm, shoot your car, put it out of its misery.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: soficrow

Great...my car is used for locomotion as well. Can it be now considered a person? I'll then be able to really take on the 9 out 10 mechanics who don't look after her.


If you watch the insurance commercials, in one a girl named her car Brad.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Cool! Maybe it will choose to identify as a lake



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

It's actually not giving the river any rights whatsoever. What it does is give property rights over the river to the tribe. This may be a blessing or a bust for the tribe. Does the tribe have the financial means to litigate issues over the protection of the river? If not, all detrimental things done to the river may go unpunished. Has the gov't ceded all environmental protection responsibility to the tribe? If so, what powers were granted? Is police action by the tribe allowed? To me, this may just be a symbolic ruling with little teeth in it. Otherwise, it might be the end of the river.

Regarding corporations as people, it is exactly what they are. They were created as legal fictions in order to protect property rights, etc.. They have the right to sue and can be sued. They can seek criminal complaints and be charged criminally, etc. etc..



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Butterfinger
I literally had to stop and laugh for that one



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

So who pays when this river trespass onto private land again and again.




top topics



 
3

log in

join