Eco-centric laws, such as Rights of Nature (RoN), are emerging worldwide, with over 300 RoN laws, policies and judicial decisions in approx. 40 countries. RoN is growing as a response to our combined environmental crisis, where environmental law has been limited in its effectiveness to reverse decline and restore ecosystems to health, a contribution of anthropocentric laws and worldviews that view humans as separate from Nature, and Nature as a resource and property, here for human benefit and utility. In 2017, headlines were erupting. Rivers, forests and Nature were being recognised as subjects of rights all over the world. But only a select few were talking about the Rights of Nature movement within the context of the Ocean. This is why Michelle Bender created the Ocean Rights Framework – to address this gap and transform the human-Ocean relationship from one of exploitation to stewardship. Thus, ‘Ocean Rights’ emerges from the ethical and moral recognition of the Ocean as a living entity with inherent rights and intrinsic values. Ocean Rights seeks to shift the human-Ocean relationship from one of domination and exploitation to one of respect and stewardship through an ecosystem basis for ethics and Ocean governance (reinforcing the notion that humanity exists as an interdependent and interconnected part of the whole). The effective and full implementation of Ocean Rights involves several strategies that combine legal, policy, economic, educational and community-based approaches.

Ocean Rights constitutes a specific dimension of Rights of Nature, existing in some shape or form in approximately 40 countries. Though hundreds of Rights of Nature laws, policies and judicial decisions exist, only approx. 5% of those are specific to marine ecosystems or species. These examples can generally be found in one of two repositories; the Eco Jurisprudence Monitor, and UN Harmony with Nature. Specific examples include: recognition of the Rio Doce Wave Ecosystem in Brasil as a living being with intrinsic rights, He Whakaputanga Moana (Declaration for the Ocean) a global call for legal personhood for Whales, the recognition of sea turtles as subjects of rights in Panama through National Law 317, the recognition of marine turtles and sharks as natural entities subject to rights in the Loyalty Islands Province of New Caledonia, and court cases in Ecuador protecting sharks and mangroves through Constitutional recognition of the Rights of Nature.

Ocean Rights facilitates the recognition of the Ocean’s legal personality by affirming the moral and ethical consideration of the Ocean’s intrinsic values and rights. Some hold the view that Nature, or its elements, cannot hold rights or personhood. However, the Ocean can have legal personality! In fact, recognition of an entity as a legal person or subject of rights is not limited to human entities. For example, corporations and ships have been given legal personality in many jurisdictions. Additionally, Ocean Rights aligns with the principles and objectives of UNCLOS. UNCLOS is often regarded as the "Constitution for the Ocean.” Recognizing the Ocean as a legal person would not contradict UNCLOS but rather enhance its implementation by ensuring the protection and preservation of the marine environment, a fundamental goal (and legal obligation) of the Convention.

The recognition of Ocean Rights may help bring about a paradigm shift in humanity’s relationship with the Ocean. Similar to Human Rights, the existence of a right confers a duty upon others to respect and ensure those rights. As a subject of rights, humanity now has a duty to respect and ensure the full enjoyment and realisation of Ocean Rights. Ocean protection becomes the standard and cannot be ignored. This does not mean that the Ocean is intangible or every activity constitutes a violation of its rights, but rather that the Ocean, and its biological interactions and ecological relationships, must be given serious consideration through regulation and enforcement. As the current model of sustainability assumes that Nature, people and the economy can function independently of one another, a more accurate model would be based on nested hierarchies “that follow the natural orders of life, with each level being dependent on the one above for its existence.” [1] The Rights of Nature framework has been designed accordingly and “encompasses both human and economic rights in ‘right relationship,’” thus, reorienting Nature, people and the economy in a nested and synergistic hierarchy. [2] Therefore, Ocean Rights seeks to better create harmony among society, the Ocean and the economy. Finally, it is vital to clarify that a legal person is not synonymous with a human person, nor that a legal person has the same rights and duties as a human being. Therefore, Ocean Rights are not the same, nor have the same meaning, as human rights. Building off the philosophy of Thomas Berry, humans have human rights, rivers have river rights, and the Ocean has Ocean Rights. [3] [1] Michele Carducci et al., Towards an EU Charter of the Fundamental Rights of Nature, 2019, qe-03-20-586-en-n.pdf (europa.eu), p. 5. [2] Carducci M., Bagni S., Montini M., Mumta I., Lorubbio V., Barreca A., Di Francesco Maesa C., Musarò E., Spinks L., Powlesland P. (2020) Towards an EU Charter of the Fundamental Rights of Nature. Study, Brussels: European Economic and Social Committee, p. 5. [3] Berry, Thomas, The Great Work: Our Way Into the Future. Harmony (1999).