01 December 2020
A panel of top international lawyers examines the definition of ecocide. A clear legal definition is essential for the recognition of ecocide as an international crime. Worldwide, there is growing support for the idea of criminalising damage to ecosystems through the International Criminal Court (ICC) in addition to war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.
The Earth
is suffering from increasing destruction of ecosystems. Plastic soup is one of
the causes, in addition to climate change, overfishing, mining and massive
forest logging. Until now, however, large-scale destruction of nature has been
legal.
Ecocide can be criminalised by expanding the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
INCREASING
SUPPORT
The team of specialist lawyers was brought together by Stop Ecocide at the request of Swedish politicians. The time is right. Earlier this year, French President Macron also backed the idea. The new Belgian government has promised diplomatic support.
For years, British lawyer Poly Higgins has made efforts to make ecocide a crime. After her untimely death, her work is continued by her organisation Stop Ecocide, which is also represented in the Netherlands.
DEFINITION
ECOCIDE
Countries
wishing to criminalise ecocide may submit a proposal to amend the Rome Statute.
Early next year, there should be a definition under which they can do so. This
possibility can for example be used by small island states that are flooded as
a result of climate change.
It is now
almost a year since an ambassador from the island state of Vanuatu was the
first to propose making ecocide a criminal offence. At the time, Vanuatu could
not make a formal request for an amendment to the Rome Statute in the absence
of an unambiguous definition.
PROBLEMS
Individuals
can be convicted by the International Criminal Court, but this is not the case
for companies and governments. The team of lawyers will look at some difficult
legal issues. When is there enough ground to prosecute an individual? Who can
be held accountable and who cannot? How do you show that a CEO of a
multinational had the intention to destroy nature?
These and
other barriers must be overcome. Because without a law there is no crime and, consequently,
no legal protection of ecosystems.
You might also like: