UN Charter’s “Sovereignty” Gives Brazil the Legal Right to Destroy the Lungs of the Earth


Roger Kotila | Democratic World Federalists – TRANSCEND Media Service

20 Nov 2020 – The Center for UN Constitutional Research (CUNCR) based in Brussels is a leading edge think tank challenging the notion that the United Nations Charter cannot be revised or replaced.  The Charter’s flaws are serious.

CUNCR along with Democratic World Federalists (DWF), the World Constitution & Parliament Association – India (WCPA-India), and the Earth Constitution Institute (ECI) have launched THE SAN FRANCISCO PROMISE, a plan to have the UN General Assembly review the defective, obsolete UN Charter.  The goal?  A “new UN” using the Earth Constitution as a guide and model to fix the Charter, or replace it.

Destructive sovereignty

The principle of national sovereignty in the Charter gives any national government the legal right to destroy Mother Earth and perhaps, humanity itself.  This is not an exaggeration.   From climate change to war to nuclear weapons, the UN has been frustrated and unable to get the job done as self-centered governments defy the common good.

We routinely see the effects of climate change with its extreme weather conditions.  We are horrified by the growing nuclear arms race which the UN is trying to stop, but has no means to enforce the new international legal ban against nuclear weapons.  The USA and other nuclear states are brazenly defying the UN’s new legal ban.  The Pentagon is leading a dangerous nuclear arms race which it calls a “modernization” Life Extension Program, but which is better described as a Life Extinction Program.

Professor Glen T. Martin (*Martin, 2020) warns about the sovereignty principle in the UN Charter which allows governments to endanger the Earth and humanity itself, and to do so legally.

Here are EXCERPTS from Dr. Martin’s eye opening critique of the UN with its Sustainable Development Goals obstructed by “sovereignty”.  Martin writes:

“Consider the implications of this dogma of sovereignty. The government of Brazil happens to host “the lungs of the Earth” that produce nearly 50% of the world’s oxygen and moderate the global climate in a variety of ways as explained in detail by climate scientists.  Under this system, the government of Brazil has the legal right to destroy the lungs of the earth through development by its private, profit-making corporations. The United States has the legal right not to sign the Law of the Sea convention and to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Climate Accord, even though that withdrawal by the world’s largest polluter could mean bringing down the global climate for the entire Earth.”  (Martin, 2020)*

Martin makes it clear that the UN system has a fundamental defect:

“Under the UN system, China has the legal right to produce all the CO2 it wants and send this into a global atmosphere that is daily increasing the greenhouse effect of overheating our entire planet.  All the nations of the world have these same rights, including the legal right to militarize themselves to the teeth, wasting resources badly needed to protect and restore our planetary environment. To understand this is to discern how absurd these Sustainable Development Goals and the UN system that supports them really are.”  (Martin, 2020)*

Finding a solution

Dr. Martin believes the answer can be found in the Earth Constitution:

“The Constitution for the Federation of Earth (aka Earth Constitution) does not abolish the nations but unites them within the World Parliament that represents the common good of everyone on Earth. The people of Earth are sovereign and the Earth Federation government representing them is designed to address precisely these global problems that the UN system is not designed to effectively address….”  (Martin, 2020)*

Democratic World Federalists, seeking a peaceful, just and prosperous world, has adopted THE SAN FRANCISCO PROMISE as its primary strategy;  it calls for the UN General Assembly to launch a review of the Charter, buttressed by CUNCR’s legal analysis.

[Charter review opens the door to identify what’s wrong with the Charter and what is needed to fix or replace its fatal defects.  Article 109(3), according to CUNCR, provides the legal mandate for the review, a promise made in 1945 but never fulfilled. — Editor]

CUNCR’s young climate ambassadors are spreading the word all the way up to the UN itself that climate change will require more than appealing to nations to cooperate, it will require a change in the UN’s governing system itself.

Peace activists, moreover, understand that forming a world federal union governing structure (“new UN”) is necessary to end wars between the nation-states, but also the only practical way to eliminate the danger of a nuclear nightmare.

The 193 nations making up the UN, like the original 13 colonies of the US, must unite under a federal constitution.  This is the only practical, realistic way to have a safe world to live in.  There is no shortcut.

The World Parliament &  Constitution Association – India (WCPA-India) will reach out for support from nations.  The Earth Constitution Institute (ECI) provides the visionary Earth Constitution as a model and guide for the UN General Assembly to revise or replace the outdated UN Charter.

A “new UN” is therefore possible, one given the tools it will need to actually save the world from the harm allowed by selfish sovereignty.  After all, why should Brazil, or China, or the USA, or any country have the legal sovereign right to endanger humanity?


Roger Kotila, Ph.D. is a psychologist (ret.) with many years of clinical experience with the California Dept. of Corrections doing psychiatric diagnosis and treatment with inmates. President of Democratic World Federalists and Editor of Earth Federation News & Views, he supports a “new UN” under the Earth Constitution.  Email: earthstarradio@aol.com



This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 23 Nov 2020.

Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: UN Charter’s “Sovereignty” Gives Brazil the Legal Right to Destroy the Lungs of the Earth, is included. Thank you.

If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.

Share this article:

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.

2 Responses to “UN Charter’s “Sovereignty” Gives Brazil the Legal Right to Destroy the Lungs of the Earth”

  1. Ian Hackett says:

    We share the worries of millions that the looming effects of man-made climate change could soon lead to the collapse of civilization. Like you, we also believe that the only way to thwart this will be one offering a democratic global federation to deal with the rampant GREED of a few and the short-sighted selfishness of virtually all of us that have combined to create unacceptable and unsustainable economic divisions; our NATIONALISM that has created unacceptable and unsustainable geographical divisions; and our numerous RELIGIONS that have created all kinds of other divisions, most of them wholly irrational. Along with widespread IGNORANCE, these divisive forces are preventing us from dealing with CLIMATE CHANGE, the fifth great divisive force, whose effects, if unchecked, will give us a planet of more hurricanes, more storm damage, more floods, more droughts, more failed harvests, more famine, more refugees, and more terrorist groups, all exacerbating the vicious spiral of wars, hatred and terrorism already being generated by the four primary divisive forces. There can be no healing of these divisions without a route map to the only political solution that can rid us of all of them: a federated world without today’s inequality, injustice, warrior nations and maniacal groups with vain thoughts of religious world domination; a world without any “wars on terror” or worse; a world in which today’s nation-states, European Union and Caliphate are replaced by a global community of around a thousand federated member states, co-operating to achieve sustainable development and to protect human rights. Drafting such a route map could be tricky. Following it would be even trickier. But all other routes will surely lead to an apocalyptic end to our inchoate civilization. Travel along the world federalist route is already overdue. It’s high time for you to take that first small step toward saving civilization.
    The World Federalist Party seeks to work with existing parties in the UK (Labour, Liberal Democrat, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green etc.) and with Green and Federalist parties globally, but also calls for a World Constitutional Conference to be sponsored by as many of the world’s people, parliaments and governments as possible, and aimed at producing an instrument for federal democratic world governance that builds on the supranational democracy of international unions such as the EU, and that is fit to replace the UN with a federal democratic global body capable of making and enforcing laws to control MNCs, arms production and the use of arms by nation-states, and to protect humanity from global pollution, climate change and extremes of inequality, and from nationalist and religious fanatics, while facilitating the devolution and localisation of all other aspects of government. For more information, or to join us, email worldfederalistparty@gmail.com
    Background reading: Jo Leinen & Andreas Bummel: A World Parliament (Democracy Without Borders, 2019); David Wallace-Wells: The Uninhabitable Earth (Penguin, 2019); Dyer: Climate Wars (Oneworld, 2008, 2010); Ian Hackett: The Spring of Civilization (CEF, 1973, 2006); Transcending Terror (O-Books, 2004); Succeeding Revolutions (CEF, 2005, 2006); Leopold Kohr: The Breakdown of Nations (Green Books, 1957,1986, 2001); Mayne & Pinder: Federal Union:The Pioneers (FTER/Macmillan, 1990); George Monbiot: The Age of Consent (Harper, 2004); Barbara Walker (ed.): Uniting the Peoples & Nations (WFM/WFA, 1993); Ted Wheatley: One Day Wide (CEF, 2008)
    Comments welcome.
    Mita* & Ian** Hackett,
    World Federalist Party (世界联邦党 – “Shìjiè liánbāng dǎng”).* WFP President (1993-);
    Reuters TV News Producer (1987-93);
    ITV Here & Now Presenter (1984-6);
    **WFP Secretary (2008-)
    AWF* UK Chair (1991-2) and Treasurer (1983-91 and 2004-8);
    Head of the International School of London (2000-1);
    One World Trust Director (1994-9);
    Author, The Spring of Civilization (1973); Beyond Sovereignty (1985); Transcending Terror (2004); Succeeding Revolutions (2006), The Hackett Chronicles 1012-2012 (2013).
    *Association of World Federalists, now part of Federal Union (federal union.org.uk), the UK organization of the World Federalist Movement (http://www.wfm-igp.org/)
    Check also: https://www.ywf.world/  
    We’re seven billion idiots heading for a fall
    We fight or flee for holy lands. We talk of building walls.
    Some still deny that climate change is anything to heed.
    Some just live for power. Some just live to breed.
    2. TOMORROW (2030-2050?)
    Eleven billion idiots heading for a fall
    More and more are starving now. The writing’s on the wall.
    Climate change denied no more. Too late to put it right.
    Better press that button, or some foreign idiot might.
    Half a billion chastened souls, survivors of the fall,
    May yet build on Tennyson’s dream, set down in Locksley Hall:
    “When the war drums beat no longer & the battle flags are furled
    In the Parliament of Man, the Federation of the World.”

  2. Lakshma reddy says:

    I have seen the Martin and your idea of what sovereignty and lega right means to understand the defect in UN charter and Brazil destruction of global lung space in its forest cover and how you have formed the basis of “earth constitution”.

    Let us digress a little in to history of idea underlying the concept of word sovereignty and what legal right in law means forming bedrock part of jurisprudence.
    Nations as sovereign states is modern concept enunciated by political scientists like Thomas Hobbes, Rousseau,John Austin etc after analysing the different shades of political powers in history of world and nations and laid down certain characteristics for calling some countries as sovereign and other non sovereign,subordinate parts of a bigger state or empires under emperors. Europe and Asia and later several continental empires and states on colonisation of several parts of world uninhabited or tribal people.
    The local kings or people who lost the decision making power about their own affairs in their own territories or communities resent and try to regain their own power of self determination and after bloody clash or peaceful means. It means right to self determination and not to live under dictation or involuntary submission to a foreign power.

    Ultimate power to decide about one self and such decision backed by force to enforce in its own territorial boundaries is called as sovereign and such states recognised by other powers as sovereign states after decolonisation and dissolving of imperial powers/authority..mostly through National liberation movements.USA,india,china,and most countries on earth in UN members are products of such process.
    Why national liberation movements for sovereign rights and what economic,technological,cultural,religious,lingustic and racial factors that aided the demands for and establishment of such sovereign states before,during and after world wars is history of each nation is bigger subject.
    There fore national sovereignty is taken as the aspiration of the nations and people when UN charter and UN institution/system was founded.
    It’s neither a federation of nations,nor was conferred the status of sovereign UN but in the nature of a platform for expression of issues facing each nation or nations together for some consensus and converted global action by each acceding member stàtes to treaties,agreements,accords as per the prescribed protocals.
    The UN security council as P5 countries with powers to enforce world peace and security is also the expression of will of world war victorious countries over the vanquished and other member states.

    A right is legal if it’s capable of enforcement by force of state machinery which recognised or granted the right in any form of civil,political,economic,or cultural or even religious rights with corresponding duty to obey and remedy to enforce.
    Only a sovereign states backed by military or physical force is capable of conferring such rights and duties and non sovereign agencies are not capable except pious wishes.
    UN is one such non soveregn body in its present form.
    It’s therefore not capable of recognising and enforcing if necessary by physical force in case of recalcitrant nations or bodies not obeying. Recent US actions on IRAQ,Syria,paris accord,Iran nuclear deal,WHO etc and some other countries acts and ommissions speaks volumes on UN Defect,lies here apart from undemocratic nature,dependance on funding and military power on its P5 or member states,and of its constitution.
    The 21century technology transformed the physical distances to borderless,no distance in time value and individuals are at mercy of such great powers who have such technology.its also in terms of markets power and military powers making the world with great challenges as well as oppurtunities.
    It needs an equal if not more physical power vested in some democratic representative global centre like in UN to manage the threats to the personal rights to life,liberties as human rights and make global legislations on law and justice to persons and nations etc including protection to planet and it’s natural climate and orderly outer space exploration and equal oppurtunities and benefits to all of mankind.
    It’s this changing world, we need a shared sovereign federal democratic UN, in a way substituting word sovereign states with member states in federal democratic UN with distributed powers between member nation states and global state like in US constitution after defeating civil war over states powers including the s powers of states for slavery.

    This appears to be a little long comment but I thought it necessary for understanding.
    Thank you.
    S.lakshma reddy, india.