In a European First, Landmark Verdict Upholds Constitutionality of Mar Menor’s Legal Rights
2024 Goldman Prize winner Teresa Vicente (Photo: Goldman Environmental Prize)
On November 20, 2024, Spain’s Constitutional Court issued a pivotal ruling upholding the constitutionality of Law 19/2022, which grants legal personhood to the Mar Menor lagoon and its surrounding basin. This decision—the first in the European Union to establish Rights of Nature at the constitutional level—is a historic milestone for Earth law in Europe.
This legal victory comes in large part due to the work of Spanish lawyer, professor, and activist Teresa Vicente, winner of the 2024 Goldman Prize, who initiated the campaign out of profound concern for the beloved lagoon following a mass fish die-off in 2019.
This blog post offers a breakdown of the law and analyses the court’s deliberations regarding the challenges brought against it.
Understanding Law 19/2022: Rights for Mar Menor
Satellite image of Mar Menor. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.
Mar Menor, which sits on Spain’s Mediterranean coast and is Europe’s largest saltwater lagoon, has suffered years of degradation due to pollution and poor management.
A citizens’ initiative led to Law 19/2022, the first in Europe to recognize a lagoon and its basin as a legal person.
This unprecedented move grants the lagoon rights such as protection, conservation, and restoration, and it appoints legal guardians to advocate on Mar Menor’s behalf.
These rights can be enforced in court by any individual or entity seeking to protect the lagoon’s interests. Furthermore, the law establishes accountability mechanisms for violations and invalidates any provisions, administrative acts, or measures that conflict with it.
Key Legal Challenges and the Court’s Considerations
As noted in an ELC blog post from 2024, Law 19/2022 was swiftly challenged by the Vox parliamentary group, a far-right nationalist party. Vox, the only parliamentary group to vote against granting the Mar Menor legal rights, filed an “unconstitutionality appeal” in January 2023, which was accepted by Spain’s Constitutional Court.
The State later joined the proceedings, seeking the complete dismissal of the appeal.
The appeal was based on four main arguments. Here’s a closer look:
1. Constitutionality of Legal Personhood for Mar Menor
Vox argued that the law exceeded the constitutional powers of the state, asserting that Spain’s Constitution reserves rights solely for people. The Court rejected this claim, emphasizing that Article 45 of the Spanish Constitution requires the government to ensure the rational use of natural resources to protect and improve quality of life, as well as defend and restore the environment, all in the spirit of collective solidarity. This provides a broad framework for environmental protection and allows for innovative legal approaches.
The Court pointed out that traditional measures have failed to stop the Mar Menor’s deterioration over the past forty years, justifying the need for this unique legal mechanism. It further noted that granting legal personhood to the lagoon aligns with a growing international movement to recognize the Rights of Nature. The Court clarified that these measures do not infringe on human dignity but rather safeguard the environment as essential for the well-being of current and future generations. Moreover, it stated that its role is not to evaluate whether the legislature acted wisely in adopting such legal instruments but solely to assess whether any provision clearly and beyond reasonable doubt lacks constitutional grounding.
2. The Basis of Law 19/2022: Geographic Concerns
Law 19/2022 is grounded in an article of the Spanish Constitution concerning foundational environmental protection legislation. The plaintiffs argued that this article could not serve as the law’s basis because the law applies only to the Mar Menor rather than the entire nation. The Court dismissed this argument, citing precedent that upheld state laws targeting specific geographic areas, such as those designating national parks. It also rejected the notion that fundamental state regulations must be uniformly applied across the entire country.
3. The Law’s Derogatory Provisions
The plaintiffs challenged the law’s clause that nullifies conflicting provisions in other laws, arguing that it undermines legal stability.
The Court disagreed, referencing previous rulings that recognized derogatory provisions as a standard legislative practice. Such clauses are often necessary to harmonize new laws with existing legal frameworks. The Court found no evidence that this provision created significant legal instability or violated constitutional principles.
4. Legal Certainty and Enforcement Mechanisms
The final challenge concerned the law’s alleged vagueness in enforcing the lagoon’s rights. The plaintiffs argued that by stipulating that any action violating these rights incurs criminal, civil, environmental, and administrative liability (Article 4), and that such actions will be deemed invalid and subject to administrative or judicial review (Article 5), the law criminalizes behaviors and actions without sufficient specificity. This, they contended, violates the principles of legality in sanctions.
The Court rejected this argument, clarifying that these provisions do not create new offenses or penalties. Instead, they integrate the lagoon’s rights into Spain’s broader legal system, ensuring violators are held accountable under already-established rules. The Court concluded that the plaintiffs have not made clear how the contested provisions could create a situation of normative confusion that would violate the principle of legal certainty.
Implications of the Verdict
This landmark decision reinforces the growing trend of recognizing the Rights of Nature as a means to address ecological crises. By upholding Law 19/2022, the Constitutional Court has not only secured legal protections for the Mar Menor but also set a precedent for environmental governance in Spain and beyond. The ruling underscores the adaptability of legal systems in addressing complex environmental challenges while balancing principles of legal certainty and constitutional integrity.
As the lagoon embarks on its legal journey as a rights-bearing entity, it offers hope for a more sustainable coexistence between humanity and the natural world.
