Este artículo hace una revisión a los contenidos más sobresalientes y polémicos del nuevo marco normativo de las aguas en el Ecuador, particularmente de la Ley Orgánica de Recursos Hídricos, Usos y Aprovechamiento del Agua —vigente desde la segunda mitad de 2014—, apoyándose en la categoría de «discurso del derecho» desarrollado por el jurista Óscar Correas e identificando tensiones entre las construcciones discursivas que le han dado forma. Se concluye que esta ley, que refleja la concepción política en torno a la gestión de las aguas por la «Revolución Ciudadana», da cuenta de la perspectiva de un sector que, desde el control vertical del aparataje estatal, alienta una modernización capitalista de la economía buscando sostener y ampliar el aprovechamiento rentista del agua. / Based on the concept of «law discourse content» developed by Óscar Correas, this article examines the more outstanding and controversial issues of the new water regulation framework in Ecuador, with emphasis on the «Ley Orgánica de Recursos Hídricos, Usos y Aprovechamiento del Agua», in force since second half 2014, andidentifying the tensions between the discursive constructions that frame the new regulation. This leads us to the following conclusion: the law reveals a political conception on water management by the «Citizen Revolution» which, from the vertical control of the state apparatus, encourages a capitalist modernization of the economy seeking to support and expand a rentier use of water.

John Finnis is one of the seminal contemporary jurisprudential thinkers working within the natural law tradition. His Natural Law and Natural Rights, first published in 1980, has had a significant impact and stands as a centerpiece of modern natural law theory. It is at once a work of ethics, political philosophy as well as jurisprudence. The starting point of his theory of natural law con­sists in concepts such as basic human goods, practical reasonableness and the common good. These concepts provide the foundation for his analysis of communities and society as well as the legal system. This thesis sets out to expound on his theory of natural law by exploring Finnis’ understanding of the basic human goods, practical reasonableness and the common good and the way they interact with his ideas of law and justice. Some of the more controversial or contentious aspects of his theory will also be addressed; such as the supposed self-evident nature of the basic goods and their incommensurable status. Some critics allege that his theory is lacking some of the defining characteristics of a natural law theory and that it thus fails as a theory of natural law, while others have claimed that his theory lends itself to the justification of an authoritarian society. Some of these criticisms carry more strength than others and I conclude by granting that Finnis’ theory contains some weaknesses. However, these should not weaken our appreciation of his vision of the good that law can do and the interrelatedness of law and morality.