By Josephine Götze, LL.M. candidate
Imagine a world in which humans respect and protect the fundamental rights of non-human animals, such as the right to life, the right not to be exploited, or the right to freedom of movement, not only because it is ethically right, but because the law requires it.
In the Paula Sparks World Moot on International Law and Animal Rights, this vision was brought vividly to life. The competition presented a fictitious case before the International Court of Justice, in which two states had signed a treaty encompassing a comprehensive framework of animal law. The treaty ranged from basic welfare provisions to an ambitious catalogue of animal rights.
What made this moot exceptional was its foundation in real legal developments. Ankita Shanker, the founder and director of the Sparks Moot, grounded the competition’s fictional treaty in a 2024 draft bill from Ecuador, which seeks to recognise animals as rights-bearing subjects by virtue of their being part of nature. This legislative effort was itself prompted by the landmark Estrellita ruling by the Constitutional Court of Ecuador in 2022.[1] In that case, the court declared that Estrellita, a woolly monkey who had been taken from the wild as an infant and later died following state intervention, was indeed a subject of constitutional rights. Citing Articles 71-74 of the Ecuadorian Constitution, which was the first ever constitutional law to grant Pacha Mama (Mother Nature) rights,[2] the court found that Estrellita’s rights had been violated, and it ordered the Ombudsman’s Office to propose legislation to ensure the protection of animals under the law.
Although the actual Ecuadorian draft bill has been criticised for its legal and structural limitations,[3] the treaty used in the Sparks Moot introduced a transformative amendment. It explicitly declared that the treaty adopts an abolitionist approach to animal rights. This means animals must always be regarded as rights-holders, not as objects of human use or mere beneficiaries of discretionary protection.[4] Only in cases of human necessity could a welfarist regime apply. The treaty thereby positioned sentience, not utility or species, as the core justification for legal and moral consideration. While this amendment did not resolve every inconsistency found in the real-world bill, it constituted a powerful illustration of the legal shifts required to fully realise the protection of animals under international law.The Sparks Moot was not only groundbreaking in its legal content, it was also deeply inspiring for all participants. The event brought together an international group of students, scholars, and practitioners, all committed to exploring the intersection between animal ethics and international legal structures. Participants engaged with legal tools typically reserved for human rights, such as treaty interpretation, jurisdictional challenges, and principles of necessity and proportionality, now applied to animals as legal persons.
As the first moot of its kind, it created space for bold, creative legal reasoning grounded in real jurisprudence, yet unafraid to imagine a more just future. The event demonstrated that animal rights are not merely a philosophical aspiration but a concrete legal possibility, if only we are willing to construct the legal frameworks to support them.
In this way, the Sparks Moot was more than a competition. It was a call to action. To rethink the legal personhood of animals, to challenge outdated doctrines of dominion, and to advance a legal culture that sees non-human animals not as resources, but as beings with rights worthy of defence.
For anyone who is interested in participating in the next edition of this competition: registrations are now open!
About the author Josephine Götze, LL.M. candidate:
Josephine is a recent law graduate from Germany, soon to begin an LL.M. in International Human Rights Law and a Legal Research Master at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands. A passionate advocate for both human and non-human rights, she is particularly interested in the intersections between human, animal, and environmental justice. After winning the inaugural Sparks Moot and being named World Champion, Josephine continues to use her legal training and research to advance the rights of animals and raise awareness of the shared challenges facing people, animals, and the planet.
[1] Constitutional Court of Ecuador, Judgment No 253-20-JH/22 (27 January 2022) (English translation), https://www.animallaw.info/sites/default/files/Final-Judgment-Estrellita-w-Translation-Certification.pdf
[2] Sean Oliver, ‘Ecuador’s Rights of Nature: A New Legal Momentum?’ (11 June 2024) JHULR, Available at: https://jhulr.org/2024/06/12/ecuadors-rights-of-nature-a-new-legal-momentum/
[3] Marina Lostal, Ankita Shanker and Darren Calley, ‘One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: The Search for “Rights” in the Ecuador Animal Rights Bill’ (2024) 2 DALPS 504-587, Available at: https://repository.essex.ac.uk/38586/
[4] Gary L Francione and Anna E Carlton, ‘The Six Principles of the Abolitionist Approach to Animal Rights’, Available at: https://www.abolitionistapproach.com/about/the-six-principles-of-the-abolitionist-approach-to-animal-rights/