Asociación de Funcionarios y Abogados por los Derechos de los Animales (AFADA) v. Zoológico de Mendoza (Cecilia)

The Ruling

Judge María Alejandra Mauricio of the Third Court of Guarantees in Mendoza granted the writ of habeas corpus on Cecilia's behalf, declared her a 'non-human legal person' (sujeto de derecho no humano) with inherent rights, and ordered her transfer from the Mendoza Zoo to the Sorocaba Great Ape Sanctuary in Brazil. The transfer was carried out in 2017.

The Personhood Argument Not Made

Cecilia is the operative-personhood counterpart to Lavery and Breheny's denials. The court did not invent a metaphysical category of chimp-person; it applied the existing Argentine concept of sujeto de derecho (subject of rights) and held that nothing in its definition required a human substrate. Personhood here is functional — wherever you find the morally relevant capacities (sentience, autonomy, social need), the legal status follows. The remedy was concrete and verifiable: a being moved from cage to sanctuary.

The Execution Gap Created

Almost none — and that is the point. Cecilia was physically transferred, lives in the Sorocaba sanctuary, and her legal personhood produced a tangible change in lived reality within months of the ruling. Compared to Tommy (died in captivity), Happy (still alone at Bronx Zoo), and the Atrato (still being poisoned), Cecilia is the case where formal personhood and operative personhood briefly coincided. It is the proof of concept the abolitionist personhood project needed.

Primary sources & research

• Read the primary source →

Related cases

• Shelby County v. Holder (2013)
• Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
• McCleskey v. Kemp (1987)
• Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022)

Part of The Personhood Prism, the companion to The Execution Gap by Thomas William Hornig. See all personhood cases →