The text examines the current environmental challenges threatening the cenotes within the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019 natural reserve in Yucat\u00e1n State, Mexico. It briefly analyzes a case involving a large-scale pig farm and subsequently addresses the petition by a Mayan Committee to recognize the cenotes as holders of the Rights of Nature. Finally, the concept of biocultural rights is explored as a potential ally to the Rights of Nature framework.<\/p>\n
An Overview of the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019 Context<\/strong><\/p>\n As a result of the impact of the\u00a0\u2018Chicxulub\u2019 meteorite, which hit\u00a0Mexico\u2019s Yucat\u00e1n Peninsula\u00a0approximately 65 million years ago, geomorphological formations known as \u2018cenotes\u2019 (from the Mayan dzonot<\/em>, <\/em>meaning \u2018abyss\u2019<\/u><\/a>) were formed. In this context, the \u2018Ring of Cenotes<\/u><\/a>\u2019 emerged as an area delineated by the outer edge (diameter) of the Chicxulub crater, consisting of 99 cenotes\u00a0located along the edge\u00a0within a 5-kilometer-wide strip, according to a RAMSAR information sheet<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n Due to its importance as a highly biodiverse and vulnerable natural area, the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019 was registered in 2009 in the list of Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention<\/u><\/a>. In 2013, it was declared a Geohydrological State Reserve by the Government of the State of Yucat\u00e1n through Decree 117<\/u><\/a>. According to this Decree, designating\u00a0the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019 as a State Reserve restricts the use of its soil to activities and practices compatible with \u201cthe preservation and sustainable use of natural resources, as well as with the functional integrity and use capacities of ecosystems\u201d.<\/p>\n However, the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019\u00a0is not an untouched natural area. Within it, there are many cities whose residents are predominantly Mayans, along with dozens of large-scale pig farms. Regarding the former, the existence of an inextricable and sacred relationship between modern-day Mayan communities and the cenotes, a connection that dates to ancient Mayans, is well known. From this relationship emerges the\u00a0long-standing guardianship role<\/u><\/a>\u00a0that they have played in preserving these ecosystems. As for the latter, it is important to note that many of these farms, to the present day, fail to meet all the administrative and ecological requirements. On this topic, a\u00a0Greenpeace report<\/u><\/a> has highlighted the lack of Environmental Impact Assessment. Moreover, free, prior, and informed consent from Indigenous Peoples is absent, the requirement of which is an international obligation enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the Convention No.169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.<\/p>\n Six Mayan Children Stand Against a Large-Scale Pig Farm<\/strong><\/p>\n In the mentioned above context, the case \u2018Hom\u00fan Pig Farm\u2019 takes place. Specifically, a project to build and operate a large-scale pig farm called \u2018Hom\u00fan Pig Farm\u2019 was granted all the necessary permits by the authorities of Hom\u00fan municipality and the State of Yucat\u00e1n despite not engaging in prior consultation with the Hom\u00fan Indigenous community. This issue is of considerable importance, as numerous studies<\/u><\/a> have shown that the negative environmental effects caused by this industry are\u00a0leading to the degradation of local ecosystems, including cenotes, and impacting the livelihoods of Mayan communities.<\/p>\n In response to the aforementioned circumstances, in 2016, six Mayan children<\/u><\/a> from Hom\u00fan sought federal protection through their legal representatives by filing an \u2018indirect amparo lawsuit\u2019 against the company behind this large-scale pig farm project (PAPO), as well as against various Mexican authorities at local, state, and national levels. In the lawsuit, the children claimed that the following rights had been violated: the right to a clean environment, the right to water, the right to health, the right to free, prior, and informed consent of Indigenous Peoples, and the principles of intergenerational equity, as well as the principles of precaution and prevention in environmental matters.<\/p>\n After a lengthy legal process, during which the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (Mexico\u2019s highest court) intervened, the Second District Judge in the State of Yucatan ultimately ruled in favor of the complainants in 2024 (Judgment in Amparo Trial 1757\/2019-IV-A), preventing the \u2018Hom\u00fan Pig Farm\u2019 from continuing operations. While the closure of this farm marked a victory for environmental protection and justice, it is important to consider the large number of industrial macro pig farms that continue operating in and around the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019. The situation becomes even more concerning when considering other mega-projects \u2013such as the Mayan Train<\/u><\/a>\u2013 that are negatively affecting both the ecological balance of the region\u2019s ecosystems and the pre-Hispanic biocultural heritage of Indigenous communities.<\/p>\n By and large, the Mayan communities of the Yucat\u00e1n Peninsula face harmful Western development in various forms, not only from the pig farming industry but also from \u201cmonocultures associated with genetically modified crops, tourism as well as real estate expansion, and other extractive projects that have polluted the aquifer of the Yucat\u00e1n Peninsula [\u2026]\u201d, as Jorge Calder\u00f3n has pointed out in a recent Nature\u2019s Rights in Mexico report<\/u><\/a>. As noted by archaeologist Sergio Grosjean<\/u><\/a>, around 70% of the cenotes in the Yucat\u00e1n Peninsula are polluted by \u201cwaste, agricultural chemicals, farm residues, and other pollutants\u201d.<\/p>\n The Path Forward<\/strong>: Advocating for the Rights of Nature<\/strong><\/p>\n In response to the alarming pollution of cenotes in the Yucatan Peninsula, representatives of the Mayan Committee Kana\u2019an<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>Ts\u2019onot<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>(\u2018Guardians of the Cenotes\u2019) submitted a petition to various administrative authorities requesting the recognition of those cenotes\u00a0that make up the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019\u00a0as legal entities with rights and the Indigenous communities as their guardians. Since the administrative authorities in question failed to provide a substantiated and reasoned response to the petition, the Mayan Committee filed an amparo<\/em><\/u> lawsuit<\/u><\/a> before the Fourth District Court of the State of Yucat\u00e1n, seeking judicial enforcement of their requests. However, while the amparo<\/em> and protection were granted to the plaintiffs through the judgment issued on May 7, 2024, the judge did not rule on the substantive merits of the Mayan Committee\u2019s petition but instead addressed procedural matters, ordering the authorities involved to issue a substantiated and reasoned response to the initial petition submitted by the Mayan Committee.<\/p>\n To this day, no specific natural entity has been recognized as a subject of the Rights of Nature in Mexico, whether through the judiciary or the legislature. However, Latin American experience has shown that such designation can indeed be achieved either through the judiciary or the legislative field. It is well known that the first case in Latin America where the Rights of Nature were\u00a0granted to a specific natural ecosystem was that of the Vilcabamba<\/u> River<\/u><\/a> in Ecuador in 2011, through a ruling issued by the Provincial Court of Justice of Loja. Though admittedly significant, the constitutional recognition of the Rights of Nature in Ecuador\u2019s Constitution was a key milestone in the progress of such rights\u2019 recognition. Since then, various Latin American States have followed similar steps, for instance, the cases of the Atrato<\/u> River (2016)<\/u><\/a> and the Colombian Amazon (2018)<\/u><\/a>, both in Colombia; and recently the Mara\u00f1\u00f3n<\/u> River (2024)<\/u><\/a> in Peru, to name just a few.<\/p>\n Biocultural Rights: A Key Ally to the Rights of Nature<\/strong><\/p>\n There is still much work to be done in enforcing and truly protecting\u00a0Subjects of Rights recognized as such throughout Latin America. However, taking a step forward, recognizing and protecting the inextricable relationship between Indigenous communities and the ecosystems they have historically inhabited could serve as a grand overarching strategy for advancing the Rights of Nature and for truly protecting the environment<\/u><\/a>. Most Indigenous cosmovisions do not perceive an ontological gap between Nature and Culture. As Pierre Brunet has mentioned<\/u><\/a>, the ontological and hierarchical dualism of Nature-Culture<\/em> is almost non-existent in most of the Indigenous worldviews. Instead, their biocultural heritage has been profoundly shaped by this deep relationship with their natural surroundings.<\/p>\n In the field of Human Rights, the ideas explained in the previous paragraph have evolved into what is now known as biocultural rights.\u00a0According to Cher Chen<\/u> and<\/u> Michael Gilmore<\/u><\/a>, \u201cthe concept of biocultural rights assumes that Indigenous peoples ought to have the right to maintain their distinct biocultural heritage, which is essential to the maintenance of biodiversity and cultural diversity worldwide\u201d. Moreover, within Indigenous communities, there is a sense of responsibility towards the natural surroundings, which challenges the Western concept of property as merely a commodity.<\/p>\n In this vein, the Colombian Constitutional Court, in the Atrato<\/u> River\u2019s ruling<\/u><\/a>, has recognized the importance of incorporating the concept of biocultural rights and connected it to the legal figure called \u2018Stewardship\u2019 into the Rights of Nature legal framework. Specifically, in section 5.11 of this ruling, the Court stated that biocultural rights pertain to the right of\u00a0\u201cEthnic communities to administer and exercise autonomous guardianship over their territories\u00a0in accordance with their own laws and customs\u00a0and the natural resources that make up their habitat, where they develop their culture, traditions, and way of life based on the special relationship they have with the environment and biodiversity\u201d. This is not an isolated case. Recently, in the Mara\u00f1\u00f3n River case, a mixed court in Peru recognized and appointed both the State and Indigenous organizations as guardians, defenders, and representatives of the river.<\/p>\n Furthermore, biocultural heritage encompasses not only the environmental significance of a given ecosystem for a region but also \u201cincludes the social, spiritual, symbolic, religious, or economic relationships that the ecosystem maintains with a human group that has historically interacted with it\u201d, as noted by legal scholars Medina Carrillo y Fern\u00e1ndez <\/u>Mendiburu<\/u><\/a>. However, in Mexico, the biocultural heritage is at risk<\/u><\/a>, according to the Mexican Center for Environmental Law. In fact, there is a\u00a0lack of development and reinforcement of the biocultural rights of Indigenous communities within the country\u2019s national legal framework.<\/p>\n The situation becomes even more urgent to address when considering that strengthening\u00a0biocultural rights in Mexico could also reinforce the Rights of Nature. Other Latin American states are paving the way by recognizing Indigenous communities as guardians of natural entities that have been granted the status of holders of the Rights of Nature. Consequently, Mexico now has a significant opportunity to protect highly biodiverse and vulnerable ecosystems through the Rights of Nature framework, drawing on the deep historical relation between Indigenous communities and the ecosystems they long\u00a0inhabited.\u00a0Ultimately, this is\u00a0a historical debt.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The text examines the current environmental challenges threatening the cenotes within the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019 natural reserve in Yucat\u00e1n State, Mexico. It briefly analyzes a case involving a large-scale pig farm and subsequently addresses the petition by a Mayan Committee to recognize the cenotes as holders of the Rights of Nature. Finally, the concept of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6639],"tags":[4926,3581,3794],"authors":[7555],"article-categories":[3572],"doi":[],"class_list":["post-24090","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-environmental-rights","tag-human-rights","tag-international-environmental-law","authors-daniela-banuelos-hinojos","article-categories-symposium"],"acf":{"subline":"Towards Recognizing the Cenotes within the \u2018Ring of Cenotes\u2019 as Holders of Rights of Nature"},"meta_box":{"doi":"10.17176\/20250226-000858-0"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24090","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24090"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24090\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24144,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24090\/revisions\/24144"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24090"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24090"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24090"},{"taxonomy":"authors","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/authors?post=24090"},{"taxonomy":"article-categories","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article-categories?post=24090"},{"taxonomy":"doi","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/doi?post=24090"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}