Thank you very much for your question and for your interest in this topic, Ms. Pauzé.
Indeed, section 8 of the act affirming the collective nature of water resources and promoting better governance of water and associated environments, in Quebec is very avant-garde, as it introduces the notion of no-fault liability when damage is caused to a watercourse. As a result, the people who cause the damage can be sued even if not at fault.
The problem is that the Attorney General is the only one who can bring this action, even though it is he, as the representative of the Quebec government, who grants pollution permits. He cannot sue for damages that he himself has authorized. This is a conflict of interest.
As for the recognition of a legal personality for the river, this also includes the appointment of guardians with a view to diluting powers and increasing the number of players at the discussion table. These are players who are committed to protecting the river, such as first nations, riverside communities, non-governmental organizations and scientists. They are the ones who will ultimately be able to be the voice of the river.
What is the voice of the river, really? It's what science and ancestral knowledge will tell us. These are the consequences of our actions that have contributed to polluting the river, but that we didn't know about at the time. Scientists will open our eyes to enable us to make the best possible decisions and prevent damage.
If players don't want to listen to the science or the warnings of the guardians, at that point we can use the courts as a last resort.