HABEAS CORPUS as a jurisdiction guarantee of the right to freedom of animals detained in zoos of Ecuador

Authors

  • Marcelo Mullo Sinaluisa Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo
  • Juan Agustin Garcés Lara Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47865/igob.vol6.n22.2023.248

Keywords:

legal guarantees, legal systems, natural law, prisoner, cage

Abstract

From the creationist and natural law theory, freedom is a right of every living being, it means not being subject to restrictions by positive law norms, nor by institutions and authorities created by the human being. When the social pact is created, the positive laws interpose themselves to the natural norms and rights are restricted; these limitations of rights, on certain occasions, such as depriving human and non-human animals of their freedom, are arbitrary, unfair and illegal, to avoid these aberrations in the Constitutional State of Rights and Justice there are jurisdictional guarantees that have as their objective guarantee the effective enjoyment of rights; In this context, the purpose of the study is to present the legal and jurisprudential foundations that support the theory in which it is expressed that Habeas Corpus is a jurisdictional guarantee that guarantees the right to freedom of animals detained in prisons. Ecuadorian zoos. The investigation is located in the Courts and Tribunals of Ecuador, where specialized information on Habeas Corpus was collected; it is a mixed approach research; of a pure, dogmatic, descriptive legal type; non-experimental design; for the study the inductive, analytical and descriptive method was used; the population involved is made up of judges who guarantee constitutional rights, directors of zoos, foundations and nongovernmental organizations for the protection of animal rights. The results of the investigation allow us to establish that in Ecuador there is still not enough jurisprudence and doctrine that allow the use of Habeas Corpus as a jurisdictional guarantee to release non-human animals from zoos; This argument allows us to conclude by pointing out that the detention of non-human animals in zoos is an inhumane action, which cannot be allowed in the XXI century.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Argentina. Cámara Federal de Casación Penal. (2014). Sentencia Id SAIJ: NV9953. Orangutana Sandra/Recurso de Hábeas Corpus.

Colombia. Tribunal Superior de Distrito Judicial de Manizales. (2015). Sentencia SU-016 de 2020 Habeas Corpus

Campusano Droguett, R. (2018). Godofredo Stutzin y el Imperativo Ecológico de Nuestro Tiempo. Justicia Ambiental.

Ecuador. Constitución de la República del Ecuador (2008), Registro Oficial 449, Última Reforma 25 de enero de 2021.

Corte Constitucional de Colombia. (2017). Sentencia C-041 de 2017. Disponible en:

https://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/relatoria/2017/C-041-

htm#:~:text=%2D%20Se%C3%B1ala%20que%20de%20conformidad%20con,seres%20sintie ntes%20y%20no%20muebles.

Ecuador. Corte Constitucional. (2022). CASO No. 253-20-JH. Sentencia (Derechos de la

Naturaleza y animales como sujetos de derechos) Caso “Mona Estrellita”. Disponible en:

https://portal.corteconstitucional.gob.ec/FichaRelatoria.aspx?numdocumento=253-20-JH/22

Corte Penal Internacional. (1998). Estatuto de Roma. Disponible en:

https://www.un.org/spanish/law/icc/statute/spanish/rome_statute(s).pdf

Estados Unidos. Corte Suprema del Estado de Nueva York. (2015). Recurso de Hábeas Corpus para los chimpancés Hércules y Leo.

García Román, V. A. (2022). Animales no humanos como sujetos de derechos en Ecuador (Bachelor's thesis).

Guerra Zúñiga, E. M. D. L. (2020). Cuando garantizamos a los animales una vida digna, las personas que están detrás también tendrán una vida más digna: entrevista a Andrea Padilla (Entrevistas).

García Román, V. A. (2022). Animales no humanos como sujetos de derechos en Ecuador (Bachelor's thesis).

Ley Orgánica de Garantías Jurisdiccionales y Control Constitucional – LOGJCC. (2009). Registro Oficial 2do. S. 52, última Reforma 03 de febrero de 2020.

Ley Orgánica de Salud – LOS. (2009). Registro Oficial S. 423, última Reforma 22 de abril de 2022

López García, M. (2015). La protección jurídica de los animales en el Derecho positivo español ¿algo más que mera protección?

Martín Blanco, S. (2012). Reflexiones morales sobre los animales en la filosofía de Martha Nussbaum. Revista de bioética y derecho, (25), 59-72.

Mejía Pérez, Luz Angélica. (2011). Dignidad humana y dignidad animal: Sobre los derechos fundamentales de los animales. Universidad Libre. Bogotá.

news.bbc.co.uk (2003). Born Free star McKenna honoured. Disponible en:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3357117.stm

ONU. Declaración Universal de los Derechos del Animal (1978). Disponible en: https://www.produccion-animal.com.ar/veterinaria_forense/20-Declaracion_Universal.pdf

ONU. Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos (1948). Disponible en:

https://www.un.org/es/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

Solón, P. (2017). Derechos de la Madre Tierra. Alternativas sistémicas, 133.

Torres, D. P. C., & Durán, R. W. Z. (2013). Los derechos de los animales. EDÄHI Boletín Científico de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades del ICSHU, 1(2).

Published

2023-06-30

How to Cite

Mullo Sinaluisa , M. ., & Garcés Lara , J. A. . (2023). HABEAS CORPUS as a jurisdiction guarantee of the right to freedom of animals detained in zoos of Ecuador. IGOBERNANZA, 6(22), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.47865/igob.vol6.n22.2023.248