In November 2021, Ecuador’s Constitutional Court created a national legal precedent by upholding the rights of nature for Los Cedros, a cloud forest in the world’s most biodiverse region. The court decision banned mining in the reserve by invalidating the environmental license of a Canadian company, Cornerstone Capital Resources.

The emblematic ruling also upheld the rights of communities to clean water, and to adequate environmental consultation with regards to extractive projects. This win for the forest sent shockwaves through Ecuador’s mining sector, and was celebrated internationally, providing inspiration for the growing global Rights of Nature movement. 

About Los Cedros and the mining threats

The Los Cedros Biological Reserve protects 6,070 hectares of remnant Chocó Andino cloud forest in the northwestern Andes of Ecuador. The reserve and the nearby Intag Valley form part of the protective buffer zone for the renowned Cotacachi-Cayapas National Park, and lie within what has been designated as the world’s most biodiverse region – the Tropical Andes Biological Hotspot. 

The area is home to hundreds of endangered species, many of whom exist nowhere else on earth. Both Los Cedros and Intag are known for extraordinary numbers of birds, amphibians and orchids, and are a refuge for critically endangered mammals such as the northwestern Andes jaguar and the brown-headed spider monkey. 

Surrounding the reserve and national park are rich agricultural lands, where people cultivate a wide range of fruits, vegetables, flowers and livestock through small-scale farming. Dozens of communities rely on water sourced in Los Cedros and the mountainous cloud forests of Cotacachi-Cayapas. 

Los Cedros in the mist. Image: Liz Downes

For three decades the Intag region has been threatened by grand-scale gold and copper mining. Intag subsequently hosts Latin America’s longest running anti-mining resistance movement. 

In 2017, a swathe of mining concessions were sold by the Ecuadorian Government across around two million hectares of the country. 68% of the area of Los Cedros Reserve and almost the entire area of Intag was opened up to exploration for gold and copper. Transnational companies quickly bought in. 

Across the Intag region, including around Los Cedros, communities were forced to rally (yet again) against mining activities to which they had never consented – activities which carry the almost certain risk of destroying ecosystems, biodiversity, waterways and livelihoods.

Mining concessions covering Intag and Los Cedros Reserve as of 2017-2025.

Source: Geoportal de Catastro Minero

The campaign to save Los Cedros lasted three years. Led from the grassroots, it spread outwards to the national and international level, drawing in contributions from many local community members, conservation organisations, legal experts, scientists, artists, and activists. The Constitutional Court hearing of August 2021 lasted for an entire day and a total of 80 amicus curiae briefs were presented – from scientific papers to video testimonials from communities impacted by mining.

In this emblematic case study, we present an interview with José Cueva, who helped found the Ecuadorian environmental group OMASNE, and is an organizer of the network Frente Nacional Antiminero (a current member organisation in Yes to Life No to Mining). Jose has spent decades involved in the anti-mining movement of Intag, and now coordinates a local nonprofit organisation which supports the Los Cedros reserve and scientific station. 

José speaks to the spirited community-driven campaign which was so vitally important to the three-year Los Cedros legal battle and in bringing about the successful ruling. He then critiques the impacts of the Los Cedros win for the rights of nature. He discusses the difficulties associated with amplifying the rights of nature in Ecuador, and what is needed to resource grassroots struggles against grand scale mining and extractivism in Ecuador.

What was the local context and history of resistance from which the Los Cedros case emerged?

“The first thing to mention is that the Los Cedros case did not arise spontaneously, but is part of a long context of resistance against mining in the Intag area for nearly 30 years.

Right next to Los Cedros, a little less than a kilometer from the southern border of the reserve, is a gold mine owned by the Agroindustrial company. This mine, “El Corazón,” began exploitation around the year 2000, after Rio Tinto Zinc (RTZ) carried out explorations in the territory, which led to the discovery of some deposits in Intag. During that same period—we’re talking about the 1990s—resistance against mining began in the Intag area. 

Perhaps here I should mention that in Intag, we have two clearly defined regions: the upper zone, where the resistance was centered in Llurimagua, and the lower zone (Los Manduriacus), where Los Cedros is located. In Manduriacus, the presence of the Agroindustrial mine prevented much participation in the resistance in general in Intag. So, until 2017, when the mining concession was granted in Los Cedros, there was no strong grassroots support in the area.

“Trespass Prohibited” sign displayed on gates of properties throughout Intag after the region was concessioned to a fresh wave of mining exploration in 2017. 

It was in the context of the first mining expansions in Manduriacus that the Los Cedros scientific station – under the direction of station manager and founder, José de Coux – was trying to strengthen its conservation role and involve communities in forest protection. However, the situation proved complicated, as the presence of the Agroindustrial mine itself created a deep division within the community. 

Agroindustrial established its cooperation strategy through a local organization, but also by working directly with the town councils and communities. The company has provided financial resources for the communities over the years – always funding festivals, sporting events, and providing construction materials to repair roads, schools, etc. They still have a strong economic presence in the area.

Meanwhile, in the upper part of Intag, the resistance against mining was growing stronger, with various struggles that culminated in successive victories against mining companies: Mitsubishi, then Ascendant Copper, then Codelco. Despite these successes, mining continues to be a threat. At least the resistance has prevented the development of projects – albeit at a high cost. Many people in Intag have been criminalized and persecuted, and the communities have been divided. There is no social consensus in Intag regarding mining. Many people have practically dedicated their lives to this struggle, sacrificing their personal projects. 

Contamination from exploration drilling by mining company Codelco, in the Junín cloud forest reserve, Intag, 2018.

Image: Carlos Zorrilla (DECOIN).

In this context, the resistance in Los Cedros was different to that which occurred in Intag, because there wasn’t already a strong resistance movement in the Manduriacus area. So in 2017, the Los Cedros Protective Forest found itself under a mining exploration concession which had been acquired by the Canadian company, Cornerstone. 

Straight away, José de Coux – with the participation of the Municipality of Cotacachi – began to prepare the first “Action for Protection” before the local court in Cotacachi. I should mention that this first case did not focus on the violation of the Rights of Nature, but rather on the illegality of granting a mining concession in a Protected Forest, which was prohibited by law at the time.

The action was rejected in the first instance by the Cotacachi Criminal Court. But the case was appealed and in early 2019, it was registered for a hearing in the Provincial Court of Imbabura. The Los Cedros Research Station team began seeking additional support to strengthen their case. Thus, with the help of lawyers, scientists, artists, and non-governmental organizations, this case ended favorably with a “partial acceptance” by the Provincial Court in June 2019.

Demonstration outside the Provincial Court of Imbabura in Ibarra, prior to the hearing for the Action for Protection for Los Cedros, January 2019. Image: OMASNE

But meanwhile, the presence of the Cornerstone company in the Los Cedros sector was creating strong divisions within the local communities. Due to the lack of organization in these communities, those who supported Los Cedros against mining had to confront their neighbors who worked for the mining company. By then, the company had hired 40 people – effectively 40 families. At the same time, they gave money to the communities and thus co-opted the presidents and communities.

I should also mention that Cornerstone hired the same people who made up the Los Cedros Forest co-management committee for its community relations work. This initiative aimed to involve the community in forest management, but was co-opted by the mining company. They received a salary from the company. So it was very difficult. Those who truly supported Los Cedros had to confront all of this; and, once again, two factions emerged. And obviously, the resistance group was in a weaker position due to a lack of financial resources.

After winning the lawsuit in the Provincial Court, Cornerstone’s environmental license was invalidated, and they had to halt construction. Therefore, the company, together with the Ministry of the Environment, immediately appealed to the Constitutional Court. However, this became an extraordinary opportunity, as the appeal coincided with the Court’s interest in pursuing an emblematic case to address the Rights of Nature.

About Rights of Nature in Ecuador

In 2008, Ecuador was the first country in the world to enshrine rights for nature (or Pachamama) in its constitution. 

Following Ecuador’s precedent, Bolivia and Panama have since introduced a form of these rights into their constitutional frameworks and many countries around the world have adopted forms of earth-centred jurisprudence to protect environments and support Indigenous custodianship. To learn more, visit the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature (GARN).

Rights of Nature laws have been used in numerous legal cases in Ecuador since 2008, many of which have successfully ruled to stop corporate activities which posed threats to ecosystems, rivers or species, and to demand reparations for damage. However, to date, the broad definition of these rights in the constitution have made it very difficult to create jurisprudence which can support the enforcement of court rulings. 

The context for this decision was that, although the rights of nature are enshrined in the Ecuadorian Constitution, no jurisprudence had ever been established on the subject. Therefore, judges like Agustín Grijalva, who took charge of the case, saw an important opportunity here. The Court took an interest in the case for two reasons: it involved an area of ​​extreme biological importance, and it provided an opportunity to debate the existence of mining in fragile areas. 

As a social and political action collective, we coordinated a broad working group, with the participation of scientists, academics, researchers, activists, students and artists, to generate a greater social and political impact. This would constitute an unprecedented strategic litigation case in Ecuador. 

Thus, we managed to influence not only public opinion but also the perception of the Court’s judges. The strong support achieved at the national level was evident, and this positively influenced the final judgment issued in December 2021.

How important was the role of civil society in the campaign to save Los Cedros?

So in 2018, the legal process initiated in the Municipality of Cotacachi received rapid support from a local collective here in Imbabura called OMASNE – the Mining, Social and Environmental Observatory of Northern Ecuador. This group was made up of students and professionals, including biologists working in the Los Cedros Forest, such as Mishel Naranjo, Elisa Levy, and Monserrate Vásquez – all students and activists who were deeply involved in the fight against mining.

Protests in Ibarra, 2019. Images: OMASNE

This small group, together with the Los Cedros station, held a series of sit-ins in front of the Court when the initial appeal was filed, to try to show the judges that there was citizen support. The mining company had to bring its workers through the sit-ins to attend the hearing. OMASNE tried to generate social support, as I mentioned. Local support was low at the time, and those who supported Los Cedros were very afraid of confronting these people who were paid by the mining company. The situation was very unequal. It was risky for campaign supporters to attend the sit-ins, with limited financial resources –  they couldn’t leave work to protest.

In Cotacachi, due to the history of resistance against mining, it wasn’t difficult to generate support. All the collectives linked to the cantonal assembly joined the activities in support of Los Cedros. However, in the city of Ibarra, where the Provincial Court is located, it was novel because Ibarra doesn’t have a tradition of activism in favor of nature. Even so, we managed to involve the Universidad Tecnológica del Norte, from which we received a support group, people who carried out activities, forums, and debates in which we were able to discuss this issue. However, at the institutional level, the university remained indifferent due to its financial fragility and an evident interest in obtaining resources from the mining sector and the government.

Above all, we achieved something very important: mobilizing the citizens of Ibarra. And this support widened outwards from here. When Los Cedros won the case at the provincial level, there began to be growing support on social media in Quito. People perceived the case as important for the country. By the third stage, when the legal process reached the Constitutional Court, we were gaining support nationwide.

March for Intag and Imbabura Free from Metals Mining, Feb 2020. Photo: OMASNE

That’s why people always like to see success stories. They like to see a strategy bearing fruit. OMASNE maintained its leadership role in Los Cedros’ communications strategy. We received the voluntary support of an excellent communicator, Kevin Zúñiga, and together with him and Monserrate, we led the campaign process: a lot of activity on social media and the website. We coordinated with artist and filmmaker collectives to upload information. We recorded videos spontaneously or through influential figures. 

We maintained a constant presence in the media and on the streets, holding protests whenever there was an audience or action. We held several press conferences and participated in radio and television programs, podcasts, and more.

It was a well-organized campaign that lasted many months, years. We had almost 70,000 direct supporters on social media and reached high trends on Twitter and Facebook. We also had the support of groups like Yasunidos, linked to more well-known environmental issues in Ecuador. This was vital to our strategy and thus we obtained a definitive ruling from the Constitutional Court.

This large mural opposite the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court in Quito, depicting the biodiversity of Los Cedros and the Chocó Andino, was painted by activists during the Court’s deliberations in 2021. 

Interestingly, through this process, part of the local collective currently leading the work in Los Cedros to achieve sustainability were the same people who were involved in the campaign. This was very important, as we were able to adapt activism to the specific needs of the communities – transforming it into local actions that benefit them.

Another important aspect is the role of the different groups in the campaign. Firstly, the lawyers and environmentalists who collaborated on this case showed absolute commitment, even beyond the judicial process. For example, Fred Larreátegui, who had the support of a human rights organization, nevertheless did almost everything without payment. Similarly, Edgar Merlo received some payment from an NGO, but much of his work was unpaid. 

In these fights, it’s very difficult to find lawyers who do this type of work. However, they were at the forefront of preparing the documents for the Court. They prepared and advised the amicus curiae briefs so that the documents were well presented. Other lawyers were also extremely supportive. We organized Zoom meetings during the pandemic. It was very nice that these people voluntarily joined the process.

The scientists who worked and conducted their studies in Los Cedros played a vital role. Around 25 papers were presented to the Court based on research conducted in the reserve, and scientists participated in the Amicus Curiae briefs and in the Court hearing. It was unusual for biologists here to make their position known in this way; most had not previously participated in frontline activism. They had to be careful. For example, they were very concerned about professional harassment, in terms of the difficulty of obtaining contracts for future projects.

A very important group was the artists. We worked on video broadcasts, creating songs, music, presentations, plays, paintings, drawing contests, participating in sit-ins with documentaries and small productions. Practically all of this was voluntary. The cost was minimal – only minimal expenses.

Murals for biodiversity! 1) Ibarra street painting festival, 2019. 2) Cultural Festival for Biodiversity, El Chical. Images: OMASNE

Then there were the national figures who became involved, like politicians and social leaders, community leaders in rural areas, who played a significant role in public opinion. We’re talking about people like Alberto Acosta (eminent academic and economist) and Leonidas Iza (president of the national indigenous confederation, CONAIE). There were also influential artists who had never before been involved with environmental issues, but who published videos in support of Los Cedros, which was very positive. And at the international level, support came from people from the legal world and from researchers, artists, and activists in general.

Finally, I must mention the local people in Intag who supported us. In Manduriacus, such a divided place, these people never stopped supporting us in difficult and dangerous situations – to the point that when we presented an Amicus Curiae brief signed by the communities, we obtained more than 70 signatures from the local population, including the community presidents. 

This is very brave, and it’s important because we’re moving in the context of a mining company that’s handing out money to the presidents, and of the former Cornerstone workers who threatened them with “It’s your fault we don’t have jobs.” These 70 people who signed the brief, with their names, signatures, and identification cards, were highly motivated to defend their territory. And we can’t forget the community members who presented their arguments at the final hearing – not only on paper, but also on video; the videos for the judges were very good. 

Thus, we achieved great support from the grassroots. And all this culminated in the positive ruling of the Constitutional Court, with the support of the grassroots and all of Ecuador for the rights of nature!

Demonstration outside the Constitutional Court, 2021. Image: OMASNE

Can you tell us about the immediate and long-term effects of the Los Cedros court victory?

Following the court ruling, the immediate effect was the suspension of Cornerstone’s activities. This entailed the dismissal of 40 workers. So, while we should have been celebrating in Los Cedros, we couldn’t present this victory to the communities at this time, due to the danger posed by the situation of the dismissed workers. We knew that any action we took would have long-term consequences for the reserve.

On the other hand, the outcome was obviously very positive because, at the national level, it was the first time that a ruling of this magnitude had been issued based on the Rights of Nature. We hadn’t anticipated it when filing the case, but the Court ultimately ruled on the violation of the rights of nature within a Bosque Protector (Protected Forest), which means that, in theory, the precedent could be applied to other forests protected under the same legislation in Ecuador. Therefore, the ruling broadened the issue of the Rights of Nature much further than anticipated.

There is substantial overlap between mining concessions and Bosques Protectores in Ecuador, as this class of forest is not given the same legislative protection under Ecuador’s environment laws as national parks – extractive activities are allowed. The Los Cedros ruling potentially sets a precedent for all other Bosques Protectores in the country. Image source: Vandegrift et al, 2018.

The ruling was an earthquake for Ecuador’s industrial mining sector. We all expected it to lead to many other cases, as over one million hectares of protected forests in this country are under concession for mining, and many of these forests have important characteristics in terms of biodiversity, endangered species, and fragile ecosystems.

But on the contrary, no cases emerged—very few. And for the few that did emerge, especially over time, the state and mining companies had time to develop a defense that would allow them to circumvent everything achieved in Los Cedros. Therefore, virtually no cases have been closed since, not even in the provincial courts. 

One exception was an emblematic and very important case – that of Llurimagua, also in Intag, where in 2023 the Provincial Court ruled in favor of the Rights of Nature and violations of prior consultation.

The Llurimagua Rights of Nature case: A victory for two frogs

The area of Junín, Intag, contains pristine cloud forest with similar extraordinary levels of biodiversity to Los Cedros – in fact, it is located less than 10 kilometres east of Los Cedros.

For three decades, Junín has been threatened by successive mining companies.  Staunch local resistance has repelled each company before they could get a foothold, but exploration activities have caused significant environmental and social damage. Chilean copper company, Codelco, is the most recent to attempt to develop a copper-gold project at Junín. In 2014, Codelco violently forced entry to the “Llurimagua” project, backed by police and military, who occupied the area for several months.  

In 2016 a biological survey at Junín, commissioned by conservation organisation DECOIN, rediscovered the long-nosed harlequin frog, which had not been seen for decades and was classified by the IUCN as extinct. Three years later, an endemic frog new to science was discovered nearby and named (by popular poll) the “Intag resistance rocket frog”. These finds, plus other new species identified by trained citizen science groups, proved to be an important part of the legal battle to save Junín yet again.

Resistance Rocket Frog. Image: Carlos Zorrilla

Carlos Zorrilla, founder of DECOIN, says: “The discovery of the frogs gave us a stronger basis for filing a constitutional challenge to stop the mining development. We successfully argued in the trial that the mining development would violate the Rights of Nature … We argued that it would do so by causing the extinction of the two frog species, as well as negatively affecting the habitat of dozens of other endangered species that require good quality water for their existence.

“After losing in the first instance …another lawsuit was filed alleging violation of the Rights of Nature and lack of environmental consultation. This time we managed to win not only in the provincial court of Imbabura, but the ruling was confirmed by the Constitutional Court in March 2023. The ruling determined that Codelco had to stop all mining activities within the mining concession.” So far, Codelco has complied.

This precedent is significant because it is not restricted to a particular class of protected forest (as for Los Cedros), but could be applied to any area which contains threatened species. In addition, the stakes were far higher for the Llurimagua case than for Los Cedros. The ruling defied an advanced-stage mining project heavily backed by the Ecuadorian Government, who classed Llurimagua as a priority investment. The 2023 win at Junín was a major morale boost for communities facing other mining projects within the region.

Since the Los Cedros win, how has “rights of nature” discourse evolved in Ecuador, and to what extent has this supported struggles against mining and extractivism?

Hashtags referencing several anti-extractive (mining and oil) campaigns around Ecuador, opposite the Constitutional Court in Quito. 

The issue of the rights of nature was incorporated into the Ecuadorian Constitution in 2008 after many years of struggle by communities—first and foremost, by the Indigenous peoples of the Amazon. These concepts were characterised by elements such as Kawsay Sacha (the Living Forest” for the Sarayaku Amazonian people) or “Sumak Kawsay” (for the Kichwa peoples). These concepts were incorporated into the Constitution from a theoretical construction developed by North American academia. In reality, the debates surrounding the Rights of Nature did not immediately reach society. Even today, they are not developed from the grassroots. It remains largely an abstract concept.

A key problem is that the environmental issue in Ecuador, despite emerging from powerful social struggles (people talk about grassroots environmentalism, although in reality it is more a fight for survival) continues to be present in the public eye largely through NGOs. Environmental NGOs have been fundamental in a form of social struggle, in many cases obviously motivated by a passion for nature and people’s rights. However, due to their structure and the logic of funding projects (most NGOs depend on international funds), the Rights of Nature are often presented as a “façade”. These rights have not been presented in a way that facilitates a true national debate, a genuine transmission of these concepts to and from the people; and they have limited the emergence of a larger and more powerful grassroots environmental movement.

 

“(The rights of nature) was intended to be a mechanism to support civil resistance. But despite the fact that we have tried to amplify the Los Cedros ruling and influence government policy … the results have been disappointing, because the government has been suppressing public dialogue. It is trying to make the rights of nature invisible, because it wants to promote the extractive agenda. The topic of rights of nature is strong in civil discourse, but very weak in political discourse.” 

Ramiro Avila, ex-Constitutional Court judge who ruled positively on the Los Cedros case. In conversation with Liz Downes.

Even after so many years, the issue of the rights of nature does not attract the attention of communities, not even in the context of Los Cedros. Much emphasis is placed on academic debate, but in many cases it is far removed from reality and social needs. In Ecuador, the rights of nature as a whole remain a discourse embedded in the Constitution and handled by a small and well-intentioned group of NGOs and academics. But it has not yet become a popular debate or conversation.

This occurs despite the fact that Ecuador is a country that has long supported popular struggles linked to nature. Examples include the long struggles against mining in Intag, the referendums in Azuay, and the national consultations for Yasuní and the Andean Chocó region. In all of these cases, the thesis defended was: “For nature, for the people, and against extractive industries.”

In August 2023, Ecuadorians overwhelmingly voted “yes” in a dual national referendum proposing to stop oil and mining exploitation respectively in two of the country’s (and the world’s) most biodiverse regions – the Yasuní National Park in Ecuador’s Amazon, and the Chocó Andino cloud forests directly south of Los Cedros. Image: Frente Nacional Antiminero

Unfortunately, regarding the fight against extractive industries, the rights of nature remain an almost closed discourse. It’s a discourse that tends to leave Ecuador and circulates more outside of the country than it does within. Many talk about Los Cedros, Llurimagua, and use these examples abroad. But we are far from generating a national debate that involves the grassroots.

At this time in Ecuador, social struggles around the defense of territories remain isolated. These struggles are within the territories, supported by human rights NGOs, etc., but they have not yet transformed into a national struggle against the extractive model.

So what do you see as the future of the national struggle against mining and extractivism in Ecuador?

National Strike, June 2022. Image: Frente Nacional Antiminero

The National Anti-Mining Front was formed in 2021 precisely with the purpose of taking the struggle of small and isolated communities to the national level. We have struggles that are almost endogenous, which can no longer be sustained. As activists and NGOs age, there isn’t a new generation taking up the struggle. In many cases, it’s the mining companies that have the most attractive narrative for young people, offering jobs and generating a negative perception of social struggles.

Therefore, it’s essential to take the struggle from the communities and transform it into a national movement. We need to transform the narrative from “taking care of my community, my water, my animals” and confront the extractive model together. We must change the social and political model, the neoliberal model, because we are failing. Fifty years of being an oil-producing country have not taken us anywhere good. And now the State wants to replace oil with mining, so we’re looking at another fifty years of failure.

This is how we succeeded in getting CONAIE (Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador) – the strongest Indigenous movement in Ecuador and one of the strongest in Latin America and the Global South – to sponsor the National Anti-Mining Front. The creation of the National Front was signed here in Intag, with the presence of CONAIE and many other organizations. From then on, mining has finally become a central issue in the demands of social movements.

During the 2022 national strike, we achieved a major shift in the national debate. The strike was not solely about fuel subsidies or other previous demands, but also included questioning the extractivist model. This was a major step forward. After the strike, national dialogues were established between the government and CONAIE, and mining was one of the main topics. We managed to generate a broad national debate with the participation of the entire resistance and all groups linked to the resistance against mining. Two large CONAIE assemblies were held, and basic documents were drafted, including a grassroots public policy proposal around mining.

People from Ecuador’s south take to the streets in Quito, 2023, as part of a national outcry against changes to Ecuadorian mining law by the Lasso Government. Image: Frente Nacional Antiminero

Obviously, the dialogue was limited. The government did not want to debate these issues. However, it was forced to take some necessary measures to maintain the agreements reached after the national strike. The mining cadastre was not reopened; this was one of the main demands. And the government could not continue with its idea of ​​establishing an “environmental consultation” law for its own benefit and that of the mining companies. So, let’s say that the Front achieved concrete achievements with the support of CONAIE.

But in 2023, the country entered another crisis when the Lasso government suspended the National Assembly. This was an opportune moment for the mining companies, as the government issued a last-minute presidential decree authorizing changes to requirements for environmental consultation for mining projects. Although the Court later declared the decree unconstitutional, it paradoxically remains in effect until a new law is passed. Mining companies can now claim they are “consulting” the communities within the legal framework of the decree. These consultation processes, led by the State and companies, are opening the door to destructive projects, such as the “La Plata” project in Cotopaxi and the “Curipamba” project in Bolívar.

Looking to the future, we hope to continue strengthening the foundations of the National Front and create a national social movement that sustains the struggle. The mining struggle cannot be directly sustained by NGOs or activists; it is essential that it be the people – the united communities – who sustain it.

Sign used in demonstrations at the Provincial Court of Bolívar, February 2025, against the ongoing persecution of protestors and violent militarisation by the Ecuadorian Government at the Curipamba mining project. The sign references water contamination as a violation of the Rights of Nature. Image: Frente Nacional Antiminero

And it is not just about the mining struggle, because, ultimately, the common enemy is the extractivist model. It is neoliberalism, capitalism. Therefore, our goal is for the National Front to connect with other struggles, such as those of the peoples resisting the oil industry, the shrimp industry, the African palm industry, and all types of dispossession. To have a social movement that can confront this radical stage of capitalism, of neoliberalism, that is coming for everyone, in which mining becomes the most crude and brutal expression of dispossession.

Within the current expression of neoliberalism, the dispossession of territories is intensifying. And it’s clear that the NGO and activist model of resistance no longer achieves much. So we find ourselves in this complex stage. And we are forging a different vision of environmental resistance in Ecuador, centered on communities, people, and the poor. A vision where the dispossessed people have the main voice in this struggle and can act as a counterweight to the power of the government, to the very powerful model of which that government is an instrument – the mining model, the transnational model.”

Thousands of people gather to support Leonidas Iza, leader of the Indigenous national political party, Pachakutik, during the presidential election campaign of February 2025. Saying no to extractive expansions in Indigenous lands and upholding rights of nature, water and food sovereignty have been the main issues on Iza’s platform. Image: Frente Nacional Antiminero

Conclusion

The Los Cedros court win of November 2021 came as a result of an exciting three-year campaign led by a diverse team, from local to international. At the grassroots, local organisations led by OMASNE achieved a momentous shift in social dynamics and popular opinion – starting from a context of little to no community resistance to mining, and decades of heavy co-option by companies, and eventually creating a landscape where the Los Cedros issue could become part of the national discourse.

In Ecuador itself, the impacts of the Los Cedros ruling have been mixed. On the one hand, as intended, the ruling has set a legal precedent, opening the way for new jurisprudence and for mining-affected communities to lodge their own cases for protection of forests. On the other hand, ever since the ruling, the Ecuadorian Government has been actively suppressing dialogue about the Rights of Nature, especially in the context of state-led mining expansions across the country. Far from becoming a national paradigm shift, Rights of Nature discourse has remained enclosed in academia and NGOs. 

The Los Cedros precedent has, to date, not made a major difference to nearby areas under concession to mining companies. Communities who have been relentlessly resisting mining for decades are still battling to prove that mining activities will damage their environment, water, biodiversity and livelihoods. 

The exception is one successful case which emerged since the Los Cedros ruling – Llurimagua – which created its own Rights of Nature precedent, protecting two critically endangered frogs within a mining concession. The Llurimagua case has (perhaps more so than Los Cedros) served as a morale boost for communities on mining frontlines in the region, and represents more of a forceful precedent nationally, due to the high stakes embodied by the project, which was close to the construction stage and heavily backed by the Ecuadorian Government.

Meanwhile, since 2021, the impacts of mining related activities across Ecuador have spiralled, creating dozens of hotspots of serious human rights abuses, organized crime, and environmental damage. The militarization of mining zones and the criminalization of protestors is increasingly common, led and sanctioned by the state. Some frontlines have found themselves isolated in their local struggles, as NGO support and media struggle to focus on the main flashpoints of violence.

From this complex and difficult landscape has emerged the Frente Nacional Antiminero – the National Anti-mining Front – a grassroots movement which aims to unite the struggles across the country, provide mutual solidarity and aid, and grow a general resistance against capitalism and extractivism in partnership with Ecuador’s Indigenous Nations.

The crystalline waters of Río Los Cedros. Image: Liz Downes

Authors

Jose Cueva (transcript from recording, February 2025) and Liz Downes, 

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Carlos Zorrilla for his contributions regarding the impacts of the Llurimagua rights of nature court win. 

We would like to extend our solidarity to the grassroots organisations who are working on the frontlines of mining in Ecuador and in particular whose work is referred to in this case study: OMASNE, DECOIN and Frente Nacional Antiminero.