DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
Writ: 60-DLR-234.pdf
1 downloadsView →
Loading
Loading
FULMOS is a Feni-based community of law students, scholars, and practitioners — publishing peer-reviewed scholarship, competing on the international moot stage, and widening access to justice.
The story of the Feni University Law Mooting Society (FULMOS) began in 2019 with a simple but powerful belief: law students deserve opportunities beyond the classroom. With this vision, respected faculty members Mr. Ayatullah Khan and Mr. Moniruzzaman Muhammad took the initiative to establish a platform where students could develop the practical skills, confidence, and leadership qualities necessary to thrive in the legal profession and beyond.
Read our storyFeni Law Review — peer-reviewed scholarship reaching readers in 90+ countries.
A mooting tradition built on discipline, mentorship, and 64 national wins.
Pro bono legal aid serving hundreds of families across Feni district.
A network of 1,200+ alumni in chambers, courts, and policy across Bangladesh.
Eight years of disciplined work, measured not in trophies alone but in lives touched and ideas published.
From the flagship Annual Moot to intimate editorial workshops — join us.
Join 2,500+ law students, mooters, and scholars shaping legal excellence across the region. Become a member or support our mission.
Templates, guides, and reading lists from the FULMOS team.
Essays, opinion, and analysis from our editors, students, and guests.
This essay examines the practical consequences of granting legal personhood to ecosystems, arguing that while personhood works as a powerful legal fiction for improving environmental governance (Programme, 2023, p. 117), it raises unresolved questions about who bears accountability. The core difficulty is liability. Shifting nature from property to legal subject creates a vacuum in tort law, since existing frameworks cannot handle cases where a "living" entity causes property damage or economic loss for example, a rights-bearing riverbank collapsing and flooding downstream communities. The author proposes compensatory frameworks that separate an ecosystem's inherent rights from its guardians' fiduciary duties, including guardian immunity and dedicated liability insurance pools funded by those who benefit from the ecosystem's services. Enforcement presents a second gap. Agencies charged with protecting ecosystems often simultaneously authorize their commercial exploitation, creating an irreconcilable conflict of interest. The essay calls for independent, fiscally autonomous oversight boards empowered to litigate against state actors, alongside transparent monitoring, auditing of conservation funds, and public feedback platforms. Finally, it urges harmonization across jurisdictions: standardized criteria for standing and liability, specialized environmental courts, international tribunals for transboundary harm, and integration of indigenous ecological knowledge preventing regulatory havens and moving Rights of Nature from symbolic recognition toward enforceable global standards.