Paper short abstract:

What kind of nature is produced by judges when granting rights to natural entities? I follow the role of experts in these judicial decisions arguing that judges produce a legal capture of nature, similar to the capture practiced by natural scientists.

Paper long abstract:

After the Colombian Constitutional Court decided in 2017 to grant rights to the Atrato river, a series of natural entities have been granted rights as well. From rivers, to mountains, páramos, and even the Amazon, all have been recognized rights before different courts in Colombia. However, these decisions raise questions regarding what nature are we talking about and what nature is able to appear before the court. Unlike other decisions on environmental law, the appearance of natural entities before courts has academicians asking questions on different ontologies and the law. It is argued that the relationship between humans and non-humans before the law are transformed through these decisions.

By following few of these cases before the Constitutional Court, I ask what kind of nature is being produced. I focus on the role of experts in these decisions. I introduce the concept of legal capture which I use to explain how judges capture nature drawing a comparison with the practices carried out by natural scientists. I argue that something similar occurs as when an animal or plant or any living organism is turned into a species. Law has its own mechanisms to capture nature and allow legal standing before the court.