Ecuador’s Constitutional Court Dismissal: Warriors for the Amazon Continue Their Fight

Ecuador’s Constitutional Court dismissed a protective action by the Warriors for the Amazon, prolonging violations of their rights following an earlier court ruling mandating the removal of gas flares. Activists expressed frustration over the vague ruling that allowed continued operation of harmful practices. Despite setbacks, they remain resolute in their commitment to fight for their rights and the environment.

On January 30, 2025, Ecuador’s Constitutional Court dismissed an extraordinary action for protection initiated by the group known as the “Guerreras por la Amazonía” (Warriors for the Amazon). This activist group, in collaboration with the Union of People Affected by Texaco’s Oil Operations (UDAPT) and the “Eliminen los Mecheros, Enciendan la Vida” group, had previously secured a court ruling in 2021 which mandated the removal of gas flares in the Ecuadorian Amazon and outlined reparations for rights violations relating to health and the environment.

The action taken by the Warriors sought to ensure effective implementation of these reparations, particularly through the removal of gas flares in proximity to populated areas. Amnesty International contributed an amicus curiae to highlight ambiguities surrounding the definition of “population centres,” which allowed authorities to appear compliant without substantively addressing the ruling’s requirements. The Constitutional Court’s decision prolongs the infringement of constitutional rights for the plaintiffs and the broader Amazonian communities.

While acknowledging the state’s non-compliance with the court’s ruling, the Justices dismissed the action, asserting that “the right to due process in the guarantee of motivation was not violated.” Consequently, the Warriors and impacted communities were denied justice and meaningful reparations. Pablo Fajardo of UDAPT stated that the Court of Sucumbíos ruling contained significant flaws that permitted the government to neglect compliance with its mandates, further extending violations of constitutional rights in the Amazon.

Ana Piquer, the Americas Director at Amnesty International, criticized the Constitutional Court’s ruling, asserting that the vagueness in the original decision enables the Ecuadorian state to perpetuate the harmful operation of gas flares. She warned that continued operation would severely affect the rights of the Warriors for the Amazon and their communities, exacerbating climate change and endangering millions more in the process. As the situation intensifies, the future for the Ecuadorian Amazon looks increasingly bleak.

Despite these setbacks, the Warriors for the Amazon proclaimed their determination to continue their struggle. They emphatically stated, “We will NOT falter, we will not give up, we will not be beaten. We will continue to fight for our future, for our life, for our land.”

Since the favorable ruling in 2021, the issue of gas flaring persists unabated. The Warriors presented their case to the Constitutional Court on October 28, 2021, arguing the ruling’s lack of clarity complicates enforcement. Although the ruling demanded the removal of nearby flares within 18 months, ambiguity allowed Petroamazonas to classify flares more than 150 meters from populated areas as compliant, delaying removal until 2030. The Warriors, along with UDAPT, have publicly opposed this decision while continuing to fight for environmental justice in their region.

In conclusion, the dismissal of the extraordinary action for protection by Ecuador’s Constitutional Court represents a significant setback for the Warriors for the Amazon and underscores continued violations of rights in the region. Despite the court’s acknowledgment of incomplete compliance with previous rulings, the lack of meaningful reparations perpetuates environmental and health crises. The determination of these warriors to persist in their fight emphasizes their commitment to safeguard their future and the integrity of the Ecuadorian Amazon despite governmental obstacles and legal setbacks.

Original Source: amnesty.ca