Ecocide as a ‘Crime against Peace’

Must Read

India’s International ‘Retrospective Taxation’ Regime Vis-a-Vis PCA Rulings in Vodafone and Cairn in 2020

The imposition of retrospective taxation of foreign companies doing business in India has been at the helm of controversy...

What is the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA”) is an Act of the Parliament. It seeks to protect...

Should the Exorbitant Amounts Charged for RT-PCR Tests be Refunded?

Introduction A plea has been filed in the Honourable Supreme Court of India seeking a refund of exorbitant amounts charged...

Should CCTV’s be Installed in the Police Station?

Introduction In a recent judgment, the bench led by Justice Nariman issued directions to both the state and Union Territory...

A Legal Analysis of the West Bengal Political Crisis on IPS Deputation

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has recently summoned three IPS officers of West Bengal (WB). The decision was...

Explained: Postal Ballot for NRIs

At the end of November 2020, Election Commission sent a proposal to the law ministry to amend the Representation...

Follow us

One cannot be really hopeful of the peaceful subsistence of humanity, if earth itself is going to have an ailing existence in the future. There is, thus, much doubt cast on the current international and municipal environmental regime, on its efficacy and implementation. There are countless international legal instruments in the form of conventions, treaties, protocols but it is unfortunate that nothing much has been done to hold the group of persons or an individual criminally liable for the perpetration of crimes associated with environment. Interestingly, not much time has passed since the crusade for inclusion of ecocide in international crimes was launched. In April 2010, a fully drafted proposal on ecocide as the fifth Rome statute crime was submitted to the United Nations by Polly Higgins, a UK based lawyer and author. Since then, many have vouched for the idea of the inclusion of ecocide as an international crime prosecutable by the International Criminal Court. Notably, Ecocide is the killing of Mother Nature and is expressis verbis, the worst kind of environmental demolition. However, in spite of the support, for ecocide to become international law it would need the support of 86 nations to amend the International Criminal Court’s Statute of Rome.

As a scar on the universal landscape, Exxon Valdez released an estimated 10.8 million gallons of crude oil before the spill was contained, fouling about 1,300 miles of coastline. The remote location of the spill and a delayed and inadequate response from Exxon and Trans-Alaska Pipeline operator Alyeska made matters even worse on March 24, 1989. This accident stands as a testimony to the factum of man- made environmental demolition and casts a lingering impact on the international community. Much worse in case of Gulf of Mexico oil spill BP, there are mutual agreements being reached right now between the partners and contractors, namely Halliburton and Transocean. Nonetheless, the draft as submitted by Higgins has no retrospective provision, it is highly acknowledged fact that any retrospective law in crime leads to injustice.

Polly Higgins’ Draft Ecocide Act, 2012 is a landmark work indicating a judicial shift in intelligent, universal human consciousness to allow animal rights and environmental protection in its world. The proposal entails two kinds of ecocides, namely Ascertainable and Non-ascertainable.

On examining the already existing four ‘Crimes against Peace’, it is realized that the gravity and the adversity involved in those is incomparable to ecocide. Since, the International Criminal Court can intervene in certain circumstances even in non-signatory states by virtue of Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute, it will be possible to render justice on matters concerning silent killing of nature. Additionally, there is an unsettling question revolving around this, i.e., shouldn’t there be a drastic change in the existing international environmental regime itself and while doing so that the identified loopholes should be plugged? The existing Crimes against Peace have the element of mens rea included in them but the proposed crime of ecocide is mostly a negligent act.

Another claim supporting the inclusion is rather emotive. As the humans have right to be protected against homicide, Mother Nature or earth has a right as well against the ecocide. There is, inter alia, an underlying assumption here that the perpetrators of ecocide, viz. the corporate giants would not be able to escape the prosecution by the ICC as against the prosecution under the municipal laws. And of course, the deterrence theory would hold good even in this case. The approach might be really effective in the long run as compared to the conventional approaches the nations have been sticking to all this while. Yet another contention is that, the obscurity of the definition as suggested by Higgins. The drafting panel of International Law Commission will have to take extra pain to cautiously do the words rights with a foresight of effective lawmaking in this arena.

There is also an argument of creating an International Environmental Tribunal under the aegis of the United Nations. The rise of environmental consciousness in international law has been accompanied by another phenomenon: the growing number of international forums within which environmentally related disputes can now be addressed. The present corpus of international environmental obligations in conventions and multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) is mostly overlapping. There is little or no opportunity for the development of consistent decision making or interpretation of those obligations.

More Specifically, Article 22(2) of the ICC statute prescribes that, “The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.”  If crimes against humanity are given an ecological perspective, there are four main elements or concomitants to be fulfilled, viz. prohibitions on extermination, forcible transfer of population, persecution and other inhumane acts

To conclude with, while codifying the law, the focus area will have to be the standard of liability that can be ascribed. At times, only actus reus is enough and the liability is absolute but how to lay down the liability is contestable. An alternative view point on this is that the primary concern should be to restore the environmental damage but this argument falls flat in view of the deterrence which is needed to stop such crimes to take place in future. If the environmental character or attribute of the crime is fault or negligence based and not intent wise, the crime of ecocide will not fit the context of international crimes at present. Another plausible manner in which the change can be accommodated is that constructive knowledge of the consequences of the actions is brought into the picture. Besides this, a taxonomical classification of sub offences under the main offence of ecocide is a legitimate option. It is fairly expected from all the nations to incorporate the crime of ecocide in their criminal law corpus and fix individual accountability towards the environment, its processes and resources. It can be also asserted without exaggeration that regardless of the draft proposal being adopted or rejected, the movement or the initiative has urged the global population to take ecocide seriously.

Latest News

Doctrine of Proportionality Must Adhere to Reasonableness Principal Test: Madras High Court

Young Men's Christian Association built a commercial complex and leased it without having due permission. The District Collector & Tahsildar issued a show-cause notice...

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Release of ‘The White Tiger’ on the OTT Platform Netflix

A plea requesting a stay on the release of the film ‘The White Tiger’ by the American producer, John Hart Jr. alleging copyright violation was rejected by the Delhi High Court on Thursday.

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being imposed.  Brief facts of the case This...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.  Brief facts of the...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Bhuj in the case of...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first consignment, on 10.06.2020 and the,...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms (Dharanidhar Karimojji vs UOI). Brief Facts: The...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was to be enhanced or not.   Brief...

Delhi HC to Municipal Corp: Paucity of Funds Not an Excuse for Non-Payment of Salaries and Pensions

The Delhi High Court ruled that the paucity of funds cannot be an excuse and pulled up municipal corporations for not paying salaries and pensions to their employees as the right to receive payment is a fundamental right guaranteed in our constitution.

US Supreme Court Reinstates Restriction on Abortion Pills

The Supreme Court of the United States granted the Trump administration’s request to reinstate federal rules requiring women to make in-person visits to hospitals...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -