Mutuncin Muhalli

Daga Wikipedia, Insakulofidiya ta kyauta.
Mutuncin Muhalli

Mutuncin muhalli ra'ayi ne na doka wanda ke ayyana wasu mahallin mahalli matsayin mutum na shari'a. Wannan yana ba wa waɗannan ƙungiyoyin, haƙƙoƙi, kariya, gata, nauyi da alhaki na shari'a na mutuniyar doka. Saboda mahallin mahalli kamar koguna da tsire-tsire ba za su iya wakiltar kansu a kotu ba, “masu kula” na iya yin aiki a madadin ƙungiyar don kare ta. Muhalli ya fito daga juyin halitta na mai da hankali kan doka don neman kare yanayi. A tsawon lokaci, mayar da hankali ya samo asali daga muradun ɗan adam wajen amfani da yanayi, don kare yanayi ga tsararrakin ɗan adam na gaba, zuwa tunanin da ke ba da damar kiyaye yanayi a matsayin mai mahimmanci. [1] Ana iya amfani da wannan ra'ayi azaman abin hawa don gane alakar 'yan asalin ƙasar da abubuwan halitta, kamar koguna. [2] Muhalli, wanda ke ba da yanayi (ko sassansa) wasu haƙƙoƙi, a lokaci guda yana ba da hanya ga daidaikun mutane ko ƙungiyoyi kamar ƴan asalin ƙasar don cika haƙƙoƙin ɗan adam dama muhalli.

Fage[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Farfesa Christopher D. Stone na Amurka ya fara tattauna ra'ayin danganta halayen shari'a ga abubuwa na halitta a cikin shekarata 1970s, a cikin labarinsa "Ya kamata bishiyoyi su tsaya? Zuwa ga haƙƙin shari'a don abubuwan halitta." [3] Ba za a iya mallakar mutum na shari'a ba; don haka, ba za a iya dangana wani mallaka ga mahallin muhalli tare da kafaffen halayen doka ba. Tsaye (doka) yana da alaƙa kai tsaye da mutuntakar doka. Ƙungiyoyi masu tsayuwa, ko locus standi, suna da haƙƙi ko ƙarfin kawo mataki ko bayyana a kotu. Hukumomin muhalli ba za su iya da kansu su kawo wani mataki ko bayyana a gaban kotu ba. Koyaya, ana iya cimma wannan aiki ko tsayin daka a madadin mahaluƙi ta wurin wani ma'aikacin doka mai wakiltar. Wakilci na iya ƙara kariya ga muhimman abubuwan al'adu na yanayin yanayi, ko wuraren da ke da rauni ga amfani, lalatawa dagurɓatawa.

Ko da yake babu wata doka ta tarayya a Amurka da ke aiwatar da mutunta muhalli, wata kotun koli ta Amurka ce ta ba da shawarar yin hakan. A cikin hukuncin Kotun Koli ta Amurka ta shekarar 1972 Saliyo Club v. Morton, Mai shari'a William Douglas ya rubuta ra'ayi mai ban sha'awa yana jayayya cewa wasu "al'amuran muhalli" ya kamata su sami locus standi, kuma mutanen da ke da dangantaka mai ma'ana da wannan mahallin ya kamata su iya yin aiki a madadinsa don kariya.

Saliyo Club, ƙungiyar kare muhalli, ta kawo wannan ƙara a kan Sakataren Harkokin Cikin Gida na Amurka na lokacin, Roger CB Morton yana mai cewa gwamnatin tarayya, bisa ga Dokar Gudanarwa, ba za ta iya ba da izini ga masu haɓakawa don ginawa ba. kayayyakin more rayuwa – musamman babbar hanya, wutar lantarki, da wurin shakatawa – a cikin Ma’adinan King Valley, wani yanki na kasa. Sequoia na kasa. [4] Ƙungiyar Saliyo ta yi niyyar kare wannan ƙasa da ba ta ci gaba ba a cikin gandun daji na ƙasa, amma Kotun Daukaka Kara ta Amurka ta bayyana cewa ba za a shafa kai tsaye ga membobin Saliyo ba ba za su iya kai ƙara a ƙarƙashin Dokar Gudanarwa ba, [4] wanda "yana ba da ka'idoji don bitar shari'a" don lokutan da wani aikin hukuma ya cutar da mutum, kamar ba da izini. Kotun koli ta amince da cewa kungiyar Saliyo ba za ta iya shigar da kara a karkashin Dokar Gudanarwa ba, saboda ba za ta iya nuna cewa abin da wanda ake tuhuma ya yi ya jawo ko kuma zai haifar da rauni ga mambobinta ba. [4] Wannan hukuncin ya sa Alkalin Kotun Koli William Douglas ya rubuta ra'ayinsa na rashin amincewa, yana mai cewa ya kamata a bar mutane su kai kara a madadin abubuwan da ba su da rai a rubuce, "[t] wanda ke da kusanci da abin da ba shi da rai wanda zai ji rauni. gurbatattun masu magana da yawunta ne, ko kuma an wawashe su.” [5] Wannan ra'ayi yana da alaƙa da waɗanda ke ci gaba da jayayya game da mutunta muhalli a Amurka Canada da ma duniya baki ɗaya.

Haƙƙin cikin gida na yanayi[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

New Zealand[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

A cikin shekarata 2014, Te Urewera National Park da aka ayyana Te Urewera, wani mahallin doka mahalli. [6] Yankin da Te Urewera ya kewaye ya daina zama wurin shakatawa na kasa mallakar gwamnati kuma an rikide shi ya zama fili mai zaman kansa, wanda ba zai iya raba shi da kansa ba. [7]

Bayan irin wannan yanayin, kogin Whanganui na New Zealand an ayyana shi a matsayin mutum na doka a cikin shekarata 2017. [8] Ana kiran wannan sabuwar doka ta Te Awa Tupua kuma yanzu an gane ta a matsayin “ba za a iya raba ta kuma mai rai gaba ɗaya daga tsaunuka zuwa teku, wanda ya haɗa da Kogin Whanganui da duk abubuwan da ke cikin jiki da na zahiri.” [9] Masu gadi biyu ne za su wakilci kogin, ɗaya daga Whanganui iwi ɗayan kuma daga Crown.

Har ila yau, a cikin shekarata 2017, gwamnatin New Zealand ta sanya hannu kan wata yarjejeniya ta ba da irin wannan hali na doka zuwa Dutsen Taranaki da kuma yin alkawarin canza sunan Egmont National Park, wanda ke kewaye da dutsen dama wasu abubuwan makamantan Hakan. [10]

Indiya[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

A halin yanzu ana daukar kogin Ganges da Yamuna a matsayin mutane na doka a kokarin yaki da gurbatar yanayi. Kogunan suna da tsarki ga al'adun Hindu saboda ikon warkarwa da kuma jan hankalin mahajjata waɗanda suke wanka da watsa tokar matattu. [11] Kogunan dai sun samu gurbacewa sosai da kimanin lita biliyan 1.5 na najasa da ba a kula da su ba da kuma lita miliyan 500 na sharar masana'antu da ke shiga kogunan a kullum.

Wata babbar kotu a jihar Uttarakhand da ke arewacin Indiya ta ba da umarnin a watan Maris na shekarata 2017 cewa a ba Ganges da babbar hukumarsa, Yamuna matsayin hukumomin shari’a. Kogunan za su sami “dukkan haƙƙoƙin da suka dace, ayyuka da haƙƙoƙin mai rai.” Wannan shawarar tana nufin gurbata ko lalata kogunan daidai yake da cutar da mutum. Kotun ta ba da misali da kogin Whanganui na New Zealand, wanda kuma aka ayyana shi da cikakken haƙƙin ɗan adam.

Wannan ci gaban mutuntaka na muhalli ya fuskanci shakku yayin da kawai sanar da cewa Ganges da Yamuna rayayyun halittu ba za su cece su daga gurɓataccen gurɓataccen yanayi ba. Akwai yuwuwar a canza dabi'un al'adu da aka dade ana yi game da Ganges, wanda ke ganin cewa kogin yana da kayan tsarkakewa. [12]

Akwai ƙarin sukar cewa ana ba da kulawar kogunan ne kawai ga Uttarakhand, yanki a arewacin ƙasar Indiya wanda ke da ɗan ƙaramin yanki na kogin. Ganges yana gudana akan 2,525 km ta Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand da West Bengal, tare da 96 kawai. km mike a guje ta Uttarakhand. Ƙananan sashe ne kawai na 1,376 km Yamuna tributary yana bi ta Uttarakhand - wanda kuma ya ratsa ta cikin jihohin Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi da Uttar Pradesh. [12]

Ko da kuwa shakkun da ke tattare da hukuncin Kotun Koli ta Uttarakhand, shelar wadannan koguna masu rauni a matsayin hukumomin shari'a suna kiran yunkurin sauyi zuwa kare haƙƙin muhalli da al'adu. Za a iya gina yanke shawara a kan matsayin ginshiƙi don canjin muhalli na gaba Ko wani lokaci.

Amurka[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

A cikin shekarata 2006, wata ƙaramar al'umma a Pennsylvania mai suna Tamaqua Borough ta yi aiki tare da ƙungiyar haƙƙin yanayi mai suna Community Environmental Legal Defence Fund (CELDF). [13] Tare, kungiyoyin sun tsara doka don kare al'umma da muhallinsu daga zubar da najasa mai guba. [14] Tun daga 2006, CELDF ta taimaka tare da fiye da al'ummomi 30 a cikin jihohi goma a duk faɗin Amurka don haɓaka dokokin gida waɗanda ke tsara haƙƙoƙin yanayi. CELDF ta kuma taimaka wajen tsara kundin tsarin mulkin Ecuador na 2008 bayan zaben raba gardama na kasa. [15]

Bayan Tamaqua, wasu garuruwa da dama a duk faɗin Amurka sun tsara dokoki waɗanda, a zahiri, za su ba da haƙƙin halitta. A cikin shekarata 2008, mazauna wani gari mai suna Shapleigh, Maine sun ƙara sabbin tanadi ga kundin doka na garin. Sabbin sassan sun ba da haƙƙoƙi ga yanayi da jikunan ruwa waɗanda ke kewaye da Shapleigh, kuma ana zargin su da kwace haƙƙoƙin kamfanoni da Kundin Tsarin Mulki na Amurka ya bayar. Abin da ya haifar da canji ga lambar shari'a ta Shapleigh shi ne wani shiri na Kamfanin Nestle, wanda ya mallaki nau'ikan kwalaben ruwa da yawa kamar Poland Spring, don jigilar manyan motocin da ke cikin ruwan karkashin kasa daga Shapleigh zuwa wurin tankar ruwa.   Tun daga shekarar 2019, ba a shigar da kara a kan Shapleigh, Maine ba saboda canjin dokar garin, kuma Kamfanin Nestle bai zabi ya kalubalanci lambar ba. A wannan yanayin, CELDF ba ta taimaka wa mazaunan Shapleigh ba wajen tsara sashe na 99-11 da 99-12 na kundin dokokinsu, maimakon lauyoyi daga Vermont ne suka taimaka musu. [16] 

A watan Afrilun shekarar 2013, Celdf ya taimaka wa jami'ai a cikin Mora County, sabon Mexico wajen kirkirar iskar gas da man na ruwa da kuma jikin ruwa da ke zaune a cikin County Mora da ke zaune a cikin County. [17] Wannan doka ta sanya gundumar Mora ta zama wuri na farko a cikin Amurka don hana samar da iskar gas da mai, a wani yanki, a cikin wata sanarwa a hukumance. An shigar da kara a kan gundumar Mora a ranar 12 ga Nuwamba, 2013 wanda ya tabbatar da cewa dokar gundumar Mora ta keta haƙƙin kamfanoni, musamman na farko, na biyar, da na goma sha huɗu. A cikin Janairu 2015, Alkalin Gundumar Amurka James O. Browning ya hambarar da dokar gundumar Mora yayin da yake kallon dokar ta keta haƙƙin fara gyara na kamfanoni. [18]

A farkon shekarata 2014, Grant Township, Indiana, Pennsylvania ya nemi taimakon CELDF wajen tsara dokar da za ta ba da yanayin ruwa da ke kewaye da Grant Township haƙƙin halitta. Wani kamfani mai suna Pennsylvania General Energy (PGE) ya mai da tsohuwar rijiyar mai da iskar gas zuwa “ rijiyar allurar ruwa,” kuma mazauna garin sun damu da abin da hakan zai iya nufi ga yanayin yanayin da ke kewaye da garinsu. Ruwan da ke cikin rijiyar allurar sharar gida sharar gida ce da ta ragu daga wani tsari da ake kira fracking . Wannan ruwa yana iya ƙunsar abubuwa masu cutarwa da sinadarai masu cutar da ruwan ƙasa. A cikin Garin Grant, yawancin mazauna sun dogara da ƙaramin Mahoning Creek don buƙatun ruwa. Idan rijiyar allurar ruwan datti ta zubo, akwai yuwuwar ta iya gurbata karamar Mahoning. Hadarin kamuwa da cuta shine abin da ya sa mazauna garin Grant Township tambayar CELDF don taimako wajen tsara doka. Dokar Grant Township ta ba da haƙƙoƙin dabi'a ga yanayin muhalli da jikunan ruwa waɗanda ke cikin iyakokin garin Grant. Dokar Grant Township ta kuma tauye wa kamfanoni haƙƙoƙinsu na ganin cewa ba za a kalli kamfanoni a matsayin “mutane” a cikin iyakokin garin Grant Township ba. [19] A watan Agusta 2014, PGE ta kai karar Grant Township wanda ya fara yakin shari'a wanda zai dauki kusan shekaru biyar. Grant Township ya rasa karar da PGE ta shigar a watan Afrilu 2019, kuma alkalin kotun Susan Baxter ya umarci Grant Township ya biya kudaden shari'a na PGE wadanda suka haura $100,000. Bugu da kari, an ayyana dokar Grant Township bata da aiki.

A ranar 26 ga Fabrairu, shekarata 2019, masu jefa ƙuri'a a Toledo, Ohio sun wuce Dokar Haƙƙin Lake Erie . Babban abin da ke cikin Dokar Hakki na Lake Erie shi ne cewa Lake Erie yana da hakkin ya "girma." [20] Mazauna Toledo, da kewaye, sun sha wahala sau da yawa inda ruwan famfo, wanda ke fitowa daga tafkin Erie, ba shi da aminci don sha, ko amfani da shi, saboda gurɓatacce. Lamarin rashin tsaftataccen ruwan sha, da sauran matsalolin gurbacewar yanayi, shine ya sa mazauna Toledo su nemi taimako daga CELDF. [21] A ranar 27 ga Fabrairu, 2019, ranar da masu jefa ƙuri'a suka zartar da Dokar Haƙƙin Lake Erie, wani manomi na Ohio ya shigar da ƙara. [20] A ranar 27 ga Fabrairu, 2020, Alkalin Gundumar Amurka Jack Zouhary ya karyata lissafin, yana yanke hukuncin "ba shi da ma'ana" kuma ya wuce "ikon gwamnatin gunduma a Ohio."

A lokacin bazara na shekarata 2019, kabilar Yurok a arewacin California ta ba da matsayin kogin Klamath .

Ecuador[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Haƙƙoƙin yanayi “na wanzuwa, dagewa, kiyayewa da sake sabunta hanyoyinta” an yi shelar a ƙarƙashin tsarin mulkin Ecuador na shekarar 2008 . Wannan ya faru ne bayan zaben raba gardama na kasa a shekara ta 2008, wanda ya baiwa kundin tsarin mulkin Ecuador damar nuna hakki ga yanayi, a duniya ta farko. [22] Kowane mutum da al'umma na da hakkin bayar da shawarwari a madadin yanayi. [23] Kundin Tsarin Mulki ya yi shelar cewa "Jihar za ta ba da ƙarfafawa ga mutane na halitta da ƙungiyoyin doka da kuma al'ummomi don kare yanayi da kuma inganta mutunta duk abubuwan da suka haɗa da yanayin ." [24]

An gabatar da shari'ar farko ta nasarar aiwatar da haƙƙoƙin dabi'a a ƙarƙashin dokar tsarin mulkin Ecuador a gaban Kotun Lardin Loja a cikin shekarata 2011. Wannan shari'ar ta shafi kogin Vilcabamba a matsayin mai shigar da kara, wanda ke wakiltar kansa da 'yancinsa na 'kasassu' da kuma 'kasance' - yayin da yake ƙoƙarin dakatar da aikin gina babbar hanyar gwamnati da ke yin katsalandan ga lafiyar kogin. Wasu mutane biyu, Richard Frederick Wheeler da Eleanor Geer Huddle ne suka gabatar da wannan shari'ar a gaban kotu, a matsayin masu kula da shari'a da ke aiki don kare yanayi - musamman kogin Vilcabamba. An ba da umarnin tsarin mulki don goyon bayan kogin Vilcabamba da kuma adawa da gwamnatin lardin Loja, yunƙurin gudanar da aikin da zai cutar da muhalli. An tilasta wa dakatar da aikin, kuma za a gyara wurin. [25]

Bolivia[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Canjin tsarin mulki a Ecuador ya biyo bayan doka ta Bolivia a cikin shekarata 2010, ta zartar da ' Dokar 'Yancin Uwar Duniya ' ( Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra ). Wannan dokar ta bayyana Uwar Duniya halin 'batun gamayya na maslahar jama'a ' [26] tare da haƙƙoƙin da aka kayyade a cikin doka. [27] Dokar Haƙƙin Uwar Duniya ta ba da wasu fannoni na mutuntakar doka ga yanayin yanayi. Ana iya ɗaukar matakin shari'a don cin zarafi ga daidaikun mutane da ƙungiyoyi a matsayin wani ɓangare na Uwar Duniya a matsayin 'batun gamayya na muradun jama'a'. [28] Dokar ta bayyana cewa "Uwar Duniya ita ce tsarin rayuwa mai ɗorewa wanda ya ƙunshi al'ummar da ba za a iya raba su ba na dukkan tsarin rayuwa, masu rai, masu alaƙa, masu dogaro da juna kuma masu dacewa, masu raba makoma guda ɗaya." [29]

Colombia[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun tsarin mulkin Colombia ta gano a watan Nuwamban shekarar 2016 cewa kogin Atrat yana da haƙƙin "kariya, kiyayewa, kulawa, da maidowa." Wannan hukuncin ya samo asali ne sakamakon gurbacewar kogi daga hako ma'adinai, da yin tasiri ga yanayi da cutar da 'yan asalin yankin da al'adunsu. Kotun ta yi nuni da sanarwar kogin Whanganui na New Zealand a matsayin mutum na doka da ke rike da mutunta muhalli. Kotun ta ba da umarnin cewa za a gudanar da aikin rikon kwarya na hadin gwiwa a cikin wakilcin rafin Atrato. Hakazalika ga sanarwar New Zealand, wakilan za su fito ne daga gwamnatin ƙasa da ƴan asalin ƙasar da ke zaune a cikin kwandon.

Kotun ta ce:

" (I) ita ce al'ummomin ɗan adam waɗanda ke da alaƙa da duniyar halitta - kuma ba akasin haka ba - kuma dole ne su ɗauki sakamakon ayyukansu da ƙetare tare da yanayin. Tambaya ce ta fahimtar wannan sabon gaskiyar zamantakewar zamantakewa tare da manufar samun canji mai mutuntawa tare da duniyar halitta da muhallinta, kamar yadda ya faru a baya tare da 'yancin ɗan adam da siyasa… duniya da albarkatunta kafin ya makara… ”

A cikin watan na shekarata 2018 Kotun Koli ta Colombia ta ba da shawarar amincewa da yanayin kogin Amazon a matsayin batun haƙƙoƙi da masu cin gajiyar kariya dokokin yankin.

Kanada[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

An bai wa kogin Magpie a yankin Cote-Nord na Quebec wasu haƙƙoƙi, gami da yancin ɗaukar matakin shari'a, ta Majalisar Innu na Ekanitshit da gundumar Minganie . Hukumomin yankin da Innu na iya nada wakilai da za su yi aiki a madadin kogin da kuma daukar matakin shari’a don kare hakkinsa wanda suka ayyana da: “Hakkin kwarara; 'yancin mutunta zagayowar sa; haƙƙin juyin halitta don a kiyaye shi da kiyaye shi; 'yancin kiyaye nau'in halittun halittu; 'yancin cika mahimman ayyukansa a cikin yanayin halittunsa; hakkin kiyaye mutuncinsa; 'yancin tsira daga gurbatar yanayi; 'yancin sake farfadowa da kuma mayar da shi; kuma a karshe, hakkin kai kara.” Wannan ya yi daidai da imani cewa kogin wani abu ne mai zaman kansa, rayayye daban da ayyukan ɗan adam. [30]

Hujja da kuma adawa[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Tunanin mutuntakar muhalli yana da cece-kuce, har ma a tsakanin masana muhalli. Mutum na iya ba da shawara ga tsarin doka wanda ya yarda da haƙƙin yanayi, amma maiyuwa ba zai yarda cewa mutuniyar muhalli ita ce hanya madaidaiciya don aiwatar da shi ba. Masu ra'ayin kare muhalli suna jayayya cewa yana da daraja a iya shigar da kara a madadin muhalli, saboda zai ba da damar kare muhalli wanda ba ya dogara ga cutar da mutane. Muhalli kuma ya fi mutunta muhimmiyar alaƙar ƴan asalin ƙasar da muhallinsu. [2]

Duk da haka, akwai gardama a kan manufar mutumtakar muhalli. Wata damuwa ita ce matsayin mutum na shari'a yana nuna haƙƙin ba kawai a kai ƙara ba amma a kai ƙara. Shin kogi zai iya zama alhakin lalacewar da yake haifarwa a ambaliya? Shin za a ce ma'aikatan wannan kogin su biya diyya daga bala'o'i? Lauyan Asusun Kare Muhalli na Community Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin ya rubuta cewa wannan damuwa ita ce "daya daga cikin abubuwan da za su iya kawo cikas a ra'ayi na ikon hakki a cikin yanayi ya zama bincike kan ayyukan lalata kuma a maimakon haka zai iya kafa nau'i kamar masu kula da albarkatun kasa. muhallin da aka yi ambaliya kuma a yanzu dole ne tsarin halittu ya biya daga cikin asusun da in ba haka ba zai tafi don maido da mazaunin da aka lalata masu muhalli." [31]

Wani abin damuwa shi ne cewa ko da tare da haƙƙin doka don yin ƙara a madadin mahallin halitta, ƙararraki suna da tsada. Akwai al'amurran da suka shafi adalci na muhalli idan kudin da za a yi amfani da 'yancin yin kara bai isa ba. Wasu batutuwa sun taso lokacin da abubuwan muhalli suka wanzu fiye da iyakokin ikon da suka yanke shawara game da mutuntakar muhalli, wanda shine lamarin kogin da ke da haƙƙin ɗan doka a Uttarakhand, Indiya. [32] A cewar rahoton da gidan rediyon Jama’a na kasa ya bayar, akwai kuma lokuta da ‘yancin mahalli na iya yin hannun riga da ‘yancin dan Adam, “Yawancin dokokin [muhalli] kuma sun fuskanci turjiya daga masana’antu, manoma da kogi. al’ummomin da ke jayayya cewa ba da dabi’a na tauye hakkinsu da rayuwarsu.” [32]

Muhimmancin haƙƙin ɗan adam na al'adu[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Amincewa da kogin Whanganui a matsayin halayya ta doka a New Zealand ( Te Awa Tupua ) ya ƙunshi ma'anar al'adu "haɗin da ba za a iya raba shi ba" da iwi na gida da hapu na kogin. Al'adar Māori tana ɗaukar siffofi na halitta kamar kogin Whanganui, a matsayin kakanni kuma iwi suna da alaƙa mai zurfi tare da su azaman rayayyun halittu. Wannan haɗin da ba za a iya raba shi ba na al'adun ƴan asalin da mahallinsu na zahiri yana bayyana a wasu sassan duniya kamar Colombia inda aka yi shela irin wannan yanayin muhalli ga rafin Atrato.

Jagoran sasantawa na Whanganui iwi, Gerrard Albert, ya ce "muna daukar kogin a matsayin kakanni kuma koyaushe muna ... kula da kogin a matsayin rayayye shine hanyar da ta dace don kusanci shi, a matsayin wanda ba a iya raba shi gaba daya, maimakon tsarin gargajiya. a cikin shekaru 100 na ƙarshe na magance shi ta fuskar mallaka da gudanarwa." James DK Morris da Jacinta Ruru sun ba da shawarar cewa ba da “halin shari’a ga koguna hanya ɗaya ce da doka za ta iya tasowa don ba da dawwamammen alkawari na sulhu da Maori.” Wannan shi ne takaddamar shari'a mafi dadewa a New Zealand. Whanganui iwi sun kasance suna fafatawa don kwato hakkinsu cikin jituwa da kogin tun kimanin shekarun 1870.

Ecocide[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Manufar kare muhalli a madadin muhalli ba sabon abu bane, kuma cutar da muhalli ta yadu yana da suna: ecocide. Kwamitin Kwararru mai zaman kansa don ma'anar shari'a na Ecocide ya bayyana ecocide a matsayin "ayyukan da ba su dace ba ko kuma ba daidai ba da aka aikata tare da sanin cewa akwai yuwuwar mummunar lalacewa ko kuma ta yadu ko na dogon lokaci ga yanayin da waɗannan ayyukan ke haifarwa." Akwai masu fafutuka na mai da ecocide laifin kasa da kasa, kamar laifukan da yarjejeniyar Rome ta Kotun Duniya ta ICC ta yi. [33] Wannan zai sanya ecocide tare da laifukan duniya da aka sani a halin yanzu kamar kisan kiyashi, laifuffukan yaƙi, da laifuffukan cin zarafin ɗan adam. [33] Idan aka kara da cewa, ecocide zai zama laifi kawai "wanda cutar da mutum ba shine abin da ake bukata don gurfanar da shi ba." [33] Wannan kariyar dabi'a don yanayin yanayi shine jigon bayar da shawarwari a bayan mutunta muhalli. Shin akwai bukatar a cutar da 'yan adam don ba da damar daukar matakin shari'a? Manufar ecocide ba sabon abu ba ne, kuma ba shawara ba ne don ƙara shi zuwa Dokar Roma ta ICC. [33]

Sauran abunuwa[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

  • Hakkokin yanayi
  • Mutuncin kamfani
  • Mutumin doka
  • Mutunci
  • Kogin Wanganui
  • Ta Urewera

Manazarta[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

  1. ↑ Gwendolyn Gordon. "Environmental Personhood." (2017), at page 25.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 James DK Morris and Jacinta Ruru. "Giving Voice to Rivers: Legal Personality as a Vehicle for Recognising Indigenous Peoples' Relationships to Water." AILR 14 (2010): 49.
  3. ↑ Christopher D. Stone. "Should Trees Have Standing--Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects." Southern California Law Review 45 (1972): 450.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 "Sierra Club v. Morton." Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-34. Accessed 7 Nov. 2021.
  5. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :4
  6. ↑ Te Urewera Act 2014.
  7. ↑ Te Urewera Act 2014, ss 12-13.
  8. ↑ Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017, s 14.
  9. ↑ Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017, s 13(b).
  10. ↑ "Te Anga Pūtakerongo - Record of Understanding, 5.5.2". Archived from the original on 2019-09-01. Retrieved 2022-03-08.
  11. ↑ Dr Susan Bliss. "A river is a 'person'." 49 Geography Bulletin No 2 (2017): 17.
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 "Kwafin ajiya". Archived from the original on 2017-09-06. Retrieved 2022-03-08.
  13. ↑ CELDF. https://celdf.org/.
  14. ↑ Gwendolyn Gordon. "Environmental Personhood." (2017), at page 10.
  15. ↑ CELDF, Rights of Nature: Timeline. https://celdf.org/rights/rights-of-nature/rights-nature-timeline/ Archived 2019-07-04 at the Wayback Machine.
  16. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :0
  17. ↑ Garcia, Paula A., Olivas, John P., and Alfonso J. Griego, county commissioners. Mora County, New Mexico Ordinance 2013-01. April 29, 2013. Accessed 22 May 2019. http://countyofmora.com/sites/default/files/2013%2001%20Oil%20%26%20Gas%20Ord..pdf
  18. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :02
  19. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :1
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :2
  21. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named salud
  22. ↑ Andrew C. Revkin, Ecuador Constitution Grants Rights to Nature, New York Times, (September 29, 2008), http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/ecuador-constitution-grants-nature-rights/.
  23. ↑ Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador (October 20, 2008), Chapter 7.
  24. ↑ Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador (October 20, 2008), Article 71.
  25. ↑ Natalia Greene. "The first successful case of the Rights of Nature implementation in Ecuador." Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature. http://therightsofnature.org/first-ron-case-ecuador/ Archived 2022-02-07 at the Wayback Machine.
  26. ↑ Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra, December 2010, article 5.
  27. ↑ Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra, December 2010, article 7.
  28. ↑ Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra, December 2010, article 6.
  29. ↑ Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra, December 2010, article 3.
  30. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :3
  31. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :8
  32. ↑ 32.0 32.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :9
  33. ↑ 33.0 33.1 33.2 33.3 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named :6

Hanyoyin haɗi na waje[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Daga "https://ha.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mutuncin_Muhalli&oldid=342295"