Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Earth To BP: Crimes Against Nature Are Crimes Against Humanity


On November 26, 2010, the evolution of consciousness took a surprising, but altogether natural turn. On that date, a ground breaking lawsuit was filed in the Constitutional Court of Ecuador against BP, alleging that its knowing and reckless actions in the Deep Horizon Well disaster in the Gulf of Mexico violated the rights of Nature guaranteed in Article 277 of the Ecuadorian Constitution.  The Complaint tells a story of widespread death and destruction of Nature that has repercussions for all of Humanity.

The Rights Of Nature And Humanity Have No Borders

The basis for a court in Ecuador to hear these claims of harm to Nature – a doctrine called Universal Jurisdiction -- has thus far been reserved for prosecution of torture, genocide, and other crimes against Humanity.   If Nature, through its Guardians, is successful in prosecuting these claims, it could mark a profound shift in deep-seated beliefs about Humanity’s relationship to Nature, national sovereignty, and the rule of law.

 “[I]t’s about universal jurisdiction, beyond the boundaries of Ecuador, because Nature has rights everywhere."

This is what one of Nature’s representatives, environmental activist (and former quantum physicist) Dr. Vandana Shiva, had to say about the importance of this lawsuit:

"This morning we filed in the constitutional court of Ecuador this lawsuit defending the rights of Nature, in particular the right of the Gulf of Mexico and the sea, which has been violated by the BP oil spill. We see this as a test case of the rights of Nature enshrined in the constitution of Ecuador, which is why it’s about universal jurisdiction, beyond the boundaries of Ecuador, because Nature has rights everywhere."

Yes, The Gulf Of Mexico Has Rights

For readers who may be a bit surprised by the notion that Nature, and in particular the Gulf of Mexico and the sea, have legal rights, a brief history lesson from one of "Nature's lawyers" will bring you up to speed.  The “Rights for Nature” movement has come from the classroom to the courtroom, and from Father Thomas Berry's prescient philosophy to a Global Alliance For The Rights Of Nature, in the blink of an evolutionary eye.  In October 2008, when the citizens of Ecuador enacted the first Constitution on the planet recognizing legal rights for Nature, this movement was poised to take on global legal significance.

A suit on behalf of the Gulf of Mexico, the sea, and the fish and fowl that inhabit or migrate through the Gulf region, is certainly novel and controversial in most legal circles.  However, the legal, moral, and philosophical issues of whether Nature should have rights are settled for the purposes of this lawsuit.  Nature has legal rights because the people of Ecuador have said so in their Constitution, and BP will not be able to challenge that fundamental question of law.

Instead, the most contentious issue in this lawsuit may be whether harm allegedly caused by BP to Nature that occurred outside the borders of Ecuador is subject to the “Universal Jurisdiction” of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador – because “Nature has rights everywhere” as the plaintiffs put it.  

The principle of Universal Jurisdiction has developed under international law to enable the courts and authorities of any nation to investigate and prosecute individuals for committing genocide, war crimes, torture, or other acts that are considered crimes against Humanity, even if the crimes were committed in another country. From the International Military Tribunal at Nuremburg in 1945, to prosecutions in the new century of  Augusto Pinochet, Slobodan Milosevic, and other alleged human rights abusers, Humanity has created new avenues for Universal Jurisdiction to play out on the world stage.

"No longer can heads of state, and other actors, be sure they can commit atrocious violations and get away with it." U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, on the merits of Universal Jurisdiction

Even the United States has been challenged by the moral authority of Universal Jurisdiction to eliminate safe havens for alleged war criminals.  In 2004-2009, Germany, France, and Spain attempted to investigate and prosecute Donald Rumsfeld and other high-level U.S. officials for alleged torture and systematic abuse of detainees in the so-called war on terror.   The world learned recently through Wikileaks that the Obama administration, like its predecessor, used diplomatic pressure to stifle any prosecution in Europe of U.S. officials for torture and other war crimes.   While the political pressure was effective for the moment, the message from even our allies is clear – Universal Jurisdiction is the vanguard for assertion of the world’s core values.

Universal Jurisdiction is based on a principle that duties to preserve certain human values are considered Erga omnes, or owed to the entire world community.   It is recognition that “Humanity has rights everywhere.”  Through the assertion of Universal Jurisdiction against BP, the parallel threads of crimes against Humanity and Nature have now become intertwined.  This is where the play gets really interesting.  Or, as Shakespeare put it: “Ay, there’s the rub.”

Morality Is Nature’s Compass Where The Law Fears To Tread

The invocation of Universal Jurisdiction in this case can be seen in several ways.  First, there is a novel legal connection being made between injury to Nature and jurisdiction.  The allegation is that "Nature is everywhere" and therefore Ecuador can enforce Nature's rights wherever the harm to Nature takes place in the world.  The flip side to that coin is the assumption that Nature suffers injury everywhere, if it suffers injury anywhere.  This form of Gaia theory, which sees the Earth as a living system, is fast becoming a viable scientific explanation for climate change and other aspects of injury to Nature.  But, there simply is no legal precedent for it – yet.

In such circumstances, it makes sense to rely on a more traditional basis for Universal Jurisdiction, by demonstrating a deep moral connection between injury to Nature and injury to Humanity.  The linchpin for the exercise of Universal Jurisdiction is the principle that "some crimes. . .are of such exceptional gravity that they affect the fundamental interests of the international community as a whole."   For this moral link between Humanity and Nature to take hold, it does not require a showing that death and destruction of Nature is as important as mass murder of humans or ethnic cleansing.  In the current scale of human values, that equivalency will be difficult to accept.

For such a moral link to be made, the presentation of injury to Nature must be visceral and compelling on its own terms.  It took shocking photos and stories of ethnic cleansing in the Balkans to finally galvanize the world community to intervene against Serbia and Milosevic using Universal Jurisdiction.  So can stunning photos and personal stories of the death and destruction in the Gulf help to make the connection to shared human values that would support Universal Jurisdiction in Ecuador.

The Complaint does provide a glimpse into the horrors that have been inflicted on wildlife in the Gulf:

“Some studies have reported long-term reproductive problems in animals exposed to oil.  If oil is toxic, oil mixed with dispersants is even more toxic.  Animals that are not killed outright suffer lesions in their organs, including the brain.  They absorb oil through all of their orifices. Death by oil is horrible, and can result from hypothermia, malnutrition, anaemia and poisoning. . . .

There are impacts expected for cetaceous species (dolphins, whales and sperm whales) that use complicated communication systems for orientation and finding food. Whales, feeling asphyxiated, move up to the surface, which is covered by a layer of oil.  They come into contact with the oil slick in the attempt to breathe. . . .
  
Five of the world’s seven species of sea turtles are threatened or endangered by the Gulf oil spill, including the most abundant sea turtle species and the only vegetarian sea turtle species. . . .
 
 The bluefin tuna is another marine species devastated by the oil spill. The Gulf of Mexico is one of the world’s two spawning grounds for the bluefin tuna. . . .

At least 16 bird species are threatened by the Gulf oil spill. From the humble plover to the majestic snowy egret, the Gulf Coast provides the habitat for countless birds and is significant for the preservation of many species, including a number of rare and endangered birds. Birds are among the creatures most vulnerable to the effects of the BP oil spill. Oil on their feathers destroys their natural waterproofing, and since they can no longer regulate their body temperature, they can die of hypothermia. . . .”
(Complaint pages 6-8). 



Deep within each of us lies a cellular memory of our connection to Nature that is a source of empathy when wildlife suffers in this way.  Yet, for some, empathy for Nature is but a faint murmur, and more is required to compel action.

If Nature Is In Peril, Humanity Is In Peril

It is important to remember that most of Humanity still views the world through the lens of Dominion over Nature, where only harm to humans truly matters.  For this case to help bring about a form of “push evolution” toward unity consciousness, the injury to Nature must not only wound the human conscience, it must also threaten our own existence.

Nature’s guardians in this case begin to make that connection in telling the world why the Complaint was filed:

“[B]ecause it is an ethical imperative in these times when even the most optimistic voices warn that humankind is losing its future. . . . Because we recognize ourselves as men and women who depend on the air to breathe; on the water to revitalize us, refresh us, and give us life; on the species that surround us to maintain the balance of life and the planet, to astonish us with their beauty and amaze us with the immense capacity for collaboration and solidarity among the species found in nature; on the sea, which holds the secrets of existence in its vastness, and is the birthplace of life as we know it.

For this shift to unity consciousness to spread deeper roots, every opportunity to light the way across these moral and existential bridges to Nature must be seized.

"Todos Somos Seres Universales"

John F. Kennedy went to Berlin in June of 1963, to proclaim America’s solidarity with victims of the Cold War, by declaring: "Ich bin ein Berliner."   In 2008, candidate Barack Obama came back to Berlin to express a desire for global solidarity, saying: "I come here. . .as a citizen of the World."  The day will arrive when a gathering of global leaders comes to Ecuador to proclaim Humanity’s solidarity with Nature:  “Todos somos seres universales”: "We are all Universal Beings."  With this suit, that day is brought nearer to reality.

∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞

Friday, November 19, 2010

Welcome to Evolutionary Law

Welcome to my new blog called Evolutionary Law.  Whether you stumbled upon this blog by a "random" search, or with some form of intention through my Evolutionary Law  website, I am grateful for the direction in which the Universe sent you.  Since you have arrived here for some reason (I do not believe in accidents any more) I hope you will linger for a while to learn more about my ideas for bringing the rights of Nature and Humanity into balance.


First, a bit about my background in the legal arena.  My name is Dan Leftwich.  I live in Boulder, Colorado with my wife and 3 children (when my daughter is not away at college).  For nearly 20 years, I fought tooth and nail against some of the world's largest corporations as a plaintiffs' class action litigator, primarily with my former law firm in Washington, DC, called Berry & Leftwich.  Most of our work centered on representation of small to mid-size businesses and consumers in antitrust class actions alleging monopolization, price fixing, and conspiracies to exclude competition in many different markets.  These cases often involved damages to the public and private businesses in the hundreds of millions of dollars or more.  As contingent fee lawyers, we measured success only as prevailing at trial or reaching a favorable settlement for our clients.  By that measure, we were very successful.


I had moved from the Washington, DC area to Boulder in 2003 to escape the post-911 craziness in the city and to rekindle my spiritual work that had remained mostly dormant as I wore my battle gear as a DC litigator.  Along about the Spring of 2007, as the final darkness of the Bush era descended on the nation and the problems of the world were closing in, threatening my family's future, a strange thing happened.  The compression I felt from the weight of all the world's problems led to an expansion of my consciousness in terms of the way I began to see the evolution of the crises facing the planet and the potential for solutions.  How that expansion came about is a longer, and much more complicated, story that will be told in due course.  For now, it is enough to say that I came into contact with the writings of the great eco-philosopher, Thomas Berry, primarily his book "The Great Work," and his beautiful, dire, shocking, and hopeful narrative about the monumental evolutionary shift  happening in our lifetimes.  That call to action, along with similar hopeful but urgent nudges from Barbara Marx HubbardErvin Laszlo,  and others, served as a catalyst for a monumental shift in every aspect of my professional life.


Unfortunately for me, I did not have the opportunity to meet Thomas Berry in person before he merged back into the Universe last year, at the age of 94.  However, like many others around the world, I did take to heart his call to service.  I began to ask myself,  "what's my big idea for the world?"  Without really knowing the answer to that question, I had a felt sense that the world needs a Picasso of the Law -- someone who will turn the Law onto its head, put the eyes in the wrong place, bring a form of Surrealism to a straight line legal system.  Over the course of the next year, I transitioned away from my traditional litigation practice and Evolutionary Law was born.


So, now that you know who I am, allow me to explain what I am up to with Evolutionary Law.  You could start by visiting my Evolutionary Law website, and downloading an essay I have written titled "Evolving From Dominion To Communion: How Legal Rights For Nature Can Exist In Balance With The Rights Of Humanity."  Thomas Berry stated the case for Evolutionary Law in the following passage from The Great Work:


To achieve a viable human-Earth situation a new jurisprudence must envisage its primary task as that of articulating the conditions for the integral functioning of the Earth process, with special reference to a mutually enhancing human-Earth relationship.  Within this context the various components of the Earth—the land, the water, the air, and the complex of life systems—would each be a commons.  Together they would constitute the integral expression of the Great Commons of the planet Earth to be shared in proportion to need among all members of the Earth community. 




In this context, each individual being is supported by every other being in the Earth community.  In turn, each being contributes to the well-being of every other being in the community.  Justice would consist in carrying out this complex of creative relationships.

This is no small task, to be sure.  However, as Lao-Tzu put it:  "A journey of a thousand miles must begin with the first step."  My first step is to identify the primary reasons why we are where we are.  This "big picture" view must include the evolution of the cultural stories, or "memes", that govern humanity's consciousness and the ways in which we interact with Nature, and each other.  In my view, a meme of human dominion over the planet, based in fear and individualism, has led us to an unsustainable trajectory toward extinction, through resource depletion, environmental devastation, species destruction, perpetual warfare, and corporate  dominance of nearly all political and financial systems.  This simultaneous evolution of memes and laws is described in my essay, including a description of the new memes that I see emerging on the planet.

How the legal system will evolve to support and extend these new memes will be the primary topic of discussion on this blog.  On the Evolutionary Law website there is a link to legal issues that are a starting point for this discussion.  I will explore those topics in no particular order as the discussion progresses, hopefully, with your comments and posts adding seeds to the organic soil of the garden.  In this process, wild ideas are encouraged. Just imagine what Picasso went through as he began to experiment with his new art form.  He once remarked: "The world today doesn't make sense, so why should I paint pictures that do?" That is how I have approached the Evolutionary Law inquiry.  If we cannot experiment with new principles for the legal systems of the world, we will simply continue to experience incremental change, when spontaneous evolution is needed.

Evolutionary Law is a project under an umbrella that I call MindDrive Ventures, LLC.  The basic premise of MindDrive Ventures is the following:  "All solutions are found in the MindDrive.  We enter that sacred field through the doorway of the Present Moment."  This is the beginning of what I hope to be a fruitful journey in the Present Moment.  If this resonates with your own journey in some way, please stay in touch as we enter the MindDrive and see what happens.  Namaste and welcome.

Dan Leftwich