The Inter-American Court of Human Rights recognizes Nature as a subject of rights

Greenberg Traurig - On January 9, 2023, the governments of Chile and Colombia submitted to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the "Court") a request for an Advisory Opinion on the obligations of States to respond to the climate emergency under international human rights law. Following the corresponding procedure, on July 3, 2025, the Court issued Advisory Opinion 32/2025 (the "Opinion"), the main points of which are summarized below:

I. Recognition of the climate crisis as a human rights issue: The Court recognizes the "human right to a healthy climate" as an autonomous right, derived from the right to a healthy environment, thereby delimiting state obligations whose fulfillment can be enforced independently of other obligations related to environmental protection. In this regard, the Court specifies that a "healthy climate" is one that results from a climate system free from anthropogenic interference that is dangerous to humans and nature.

II. Enhanced State Obligations: The Court establishes the following obligations of States within the framework of the climate emergency:
i. prevent and mitigate environmental and climate damage;
ii. adapt policies and regulations;
iii. ensure full reparation when rights are violated due to climate-related causes; and
iv. refrain from adopting regressive policies.

III. Climate Justice and Equity: The Opinion mentions the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, recognizing that countries with greater responsibility for climate change must act to a greater extent than countries with less impact on the climate change crisis. This point also underscores the need to protect vulnerable groups.

IV. Participation, Access to Justice, and Transparency: It specifies that States must:
a. guarantee the effective participation of the population in environmental and climate decisions;
b. provide clear and accessible environmental information; and
c. not hinder access to accurate and complete information necessary for the population to address the risks arising from the climate emergency.

V. Recognition of nature and its components as subjects of rights: The Court specifies that such recognition constitutes a normative development that strengthens the protection of the integrity and functionality of ecosystems, providing effective legal tools to address the climate change crisis and facilitating the prevention of damage before it becomes irreversible.

VI. Jus cogens norm: It establishes the mandatory prohibition of anthropogenic conduct that could irreversibly affect the vital balance of the common ecosystem that makes life possible for species.

VII. Reduction of GHGs: It is specified that states must protect the global climate system and prevent human rights violations resulting from its alteration, for which they must mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.

Although the Court’s advisory opinions are not, in and of themselves, directly binding on Mexican judges, they can be incorporated into national law in two mandatory ways: 1) internationally, if the Court uses them in its contentious cases, and 2) nationally, when the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation incorporates these opinions into its binding precedents.

gtlaw.com