The legal basis for ocean protection in the UDOR context

Abstract

The ocean faces escalating threats, yet existing legal frameworks, primarily the UNCLOS, inadequately address comprehensive marine ecosystem protection. Recent developments in Ecuador and Colombia have introduced innovative legal frameworks recognizing either inherent rights of nature (RoN) or biocultural rights, significantly influencing international environmental jurisprudence. However, scholarly discussions have not thoroughly clarified the legal distinctions between RoN and biocultural rights within marine protection contexts. This study addresses the critical gap by analyzing landmark judicial interpretations—the Ecuadorian Constitution emphasizing RoN and the Colombian Constitutional Court’s Atrato River ruling centered on biocultural rights. Through comparative analysis, this article reveals fundamental distinctions: RoN embodies an ecocentric perspective emphasizing nature’s intrinsic value, while biocultural rights prioritize human-environment interconnectedness. The research concludes that the proposed Universal Declaration on the Rights of the Ocean (UDOR) tends to adopt an ecocentric RoN Approach, independent of cultural or anthropocentric considerations. This framework underscores ocean rights to existence and restoration, aiming for global consensus and coherent international ocean governance, thereby bridging the existing gap in marine ecosystem protection under current international law.