The concept of ecocide first began to gain global recognition at the UN Stockholm Conference in 1972 when Swedish Prime Minister, Olof Palme, called for it to be an international crime. However, when the 1998 Rome Statute was ratified, creating the International Criminal Court (ICC), the only crimes included were genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression.
As the negative impacts of climate change have heightened, so too has the political movement in favour of criminalising the destruction of our planet. In June 2021, a panel of lawyers completed a core text of a definition of ecocide as an international crime in hope that it will serve as the basis of consideration for an amendment to the Rome Statute.
Definition
The Panel defines ecocide as “unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts.”
For the statute, “wanton” means “with reckless disregard for damage which would be excessive concerning the social and economic benefits anticipated; and “severe” means “damage which involved very serious adverse changes, disruption or harm to any element of the environment, including grave impacts on human life or natural, cultural or economic resources”.
Thresholds
The definition proposed created two thresholds for unlawful conduct:
First, there must be a substantial likelihood that the conduct will cause “severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment.” This threshold alone is overly inclusive thus, the Panel included a second threshold which requires proof that the acts are “unlawful or wanton”. This addition is necessary to the balance of social and economic benefits with environmental harm through sustainable development.
The default men’s rea is as follows: “A person has intent where … that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events.” However, with consideration of the high thresholds for ecocide, the Panel decided that Article 30 men’s rea was too narrow.
Thus, they propose a men’s rea of recklessness or dolus eventualis, which requires awareness of the substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage. This is more sufficient in ensuring that those with substantial culpability for severe damage to the environment are held responsible for their actions.
Why Ecocide Needs to be a Crime
Right now, no one is held responsible for the mass destruction of the environment. This makes protecting the future of our planet very difficult hence, mass damage and destruction of ecosystems are taking place globally.
Corporations can currently be sued and fined for their actions, however, this is an ineffective device as they simply budget for this possibility. On the other hand, making ecocide a crime creates an arrestable offence, making those who are responsible for the acts that lead to severe environmental damage liable to criminal prosecution.
It is important to note that harmful industrial activities are to blame for the climate and ecological emergency that we are currently in. Companies have known most of the risks, yet have chosen to continue their harmful practices. Thus, the responsibility lies with decisions made at the top of industry, finance and government.
Ecocide has been committed repeatedly over decades and humanity stands at a crossroads as we face the climate and ecological emergency that has been created as a result. We must make a stand to hold the culprits of this mass destruction accountable if we want to save our planet. By criminalising ecocide we could address: ocean damage; deforestation; land and water contamination; air pollution; and more. It is time to make a change.
To act now follow this link: All — Stop Ecocide
To keep up with the latest legal news, click on legal to get your daily dose.
Donate & Support