Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Mining · Ecuador · 2021

Los Cedros mining permits annulled (Ecuador)

Nature's voice · report
Illegal mining and deforestation have continued in my forest since the court annulled the permits.
Did nature suffer? Yes. Harm is on record. Disputed
What the record lacks: 2 none on record · 1 insufficient · 1 disputed See the gaps
Accounts of the harm differ
Did the ruling protect the forest in practice?
  • Courts Constitutional Court of Ecuador: The mining permits violated the rights of nature. ELAW
  • Researchers Verfassungsblog (NYU MOTH): Legal mining stopped, but illegal mining and deforestation continue and the burden of protection fell on a science station. Verfassungsblog / NYU MOTH

In 2021 Ecuador's Constitutional Court annulled mining permits in the Los Cedros forest, finding that they violated the rights of nature. Reviewers reported that legal mining stopped while illegal mining and deforestation continued.

two thirdsShare of the reserve inside the state mining company's concession
As reported in the sources cited for the case; the reserve's total area is not given.

Status As of the latest source: permits annulled in 2021; legal mining stopped; illegal mining and deforestation reported to continue; durability of the ruling's implementation not established.

What?
Ecuador's Constitutional Court annulled mining permits in the Los Cedros forest. ELAW
Where?
Los Cedros forest, Ecuador. ELAW
When?
The Constitutional Court ruled in 2021. ELAW
Who?
Gained
None on record
Lost
Harmed
Why?
The court found the permits violated the rights of nature recognised by the Constitution. ELAW
How?
Communities brought a case that led the court to annul the permits.
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

Two thirds of the Los Cedros forest were within a concession held by ENAMI, Ecuador's state mining company. In 2021 Ecuador's Constitutional Court found that the mining permits violated the rights of nature, which Ecuador's 2008 Constitution recognises, and annulled them. The case was brought by communities.

Verfassungsblog, in a review of rights-of-nature implementation, reported that legal mining stopped after the ruling, that illegal mining and deforestation continued, and that the state had left the burden of protection to a science station.

  1. 2008Ecuador's Constitution recognises rights of nature
  2. 2021Constitutional Court annuls the Los Cedros mining permits as violating the rights of nature

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Did the ruling protect the forest in practice?
Courts
Constitutional Court of Ecuador

The mining permits violated the rights of nature.

ELAW
Researchers
Verfassungsblog (NYU MOTH)

Legal mining stopped, but illegal mining and deforestation continue and the burden of protection fell on a science station.

Verfassungsblog / NYU MOTH

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

    Recorded

    • The Constitutional Court found the permits contrary to the rights of nature (2021).
    • Legal mining stopped; illegal mining and deforestation continued.
    • Two thirds of the forest lay within ENAMI's concession.

    In court and with insurers

    Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

    Lawsuits and rulings

    1. 2021Claimant won
      Los Cedros rights-of-nature case
      Constitutional Court of Ecuador · Administrative · Communities → Not specified in the sources collected (the forest lay within an ENAMI concession)

      The court found the mining permits contrary to the rights of nature and annulled them, according to ELAW and Yale e360. ELAW

    Insurers

    No insurer decision on record.

    What nature saw

    Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

    Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

    Share of the forest inside the state mining concession
    two thirds
    Before the ruling
    Legal mining after the ruling
    Stopped
    Verfassungsblog
    Illegal mining and deforestation
    Continuing
    Verfassungsblog

    What we don't know

    Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

    Nature

    • Disputed Did the ruling protect the forest in practice?

    Record

    • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: mining stopped within a month of the ruling.
    • None on record The sources collected give two dates for the ruling: 1 December 2021 in one place and a resource page whose address carries 10 November 2021.
    • None on record How lasting the implementation of the ruling is could not be tracked in the sources collected.

    Did the harm stop?

    Legal mining stopped after the 2021 ruling; illegal mining and deforestation continued (Verfassungsblog).

    Who paid?

    The record collected does not identify who bore the cost of the annulment.

    Sources

    Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators✓ Courts✓ Press and investigations— Communities and civil society✓ Researchers

    Researchers

    1. Rights of nature implementation
      Verfassungsblog / NYU MOTH ·

    Connected cases

    Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.

    Law and courts

    Arbitration
    A private dispute process in which an appointed arbitrator, instead of a court, decides the case.
    Constitutional Court
    The highest court for questions of constitutional rights in a country.