Wanton acts: Ecocide, clean air, and climate justice
Global support is growing for new criminal laws to stop widespread and long-lasting damage to the natural world. Martin Guttridge-Hewitt examines the proposed legislature and asks how this could help tackle the air pollution crisis.
In March this year Forensic Architecture published an analysis of Palestinian farms. The London-based research group, which investigates everything from state violence and war crimes to ecological catastrophes, used satellite imagery to map environmental conditions across 2,000 sites. The resulting report, No Traces of Life: Israel’s Ecocide in Gaza 2023-2024, laid bare the devastating impact of war on our planet.
The Rome Statute, which governs the International Criminal Court [ICC], requires any excessive attack that knowingly causes widespread, severe, long-term damage to the natural world to be considered a breach of the Geneva Conventions on human rights. Theoretically, this should prevent military targeting of water supplies, food production and supply chains.
But, as conflicts from Syria to Ukraine continue to remind us, there’s no guarantee belligerents will abide by the rules, which are first and foremost designed to protect people – environmental safeguarding occurs by proxy. And there’s a caveat, too. Legislation only applies when the internal apparatus that would normally oversee justice for ecological incidents is no longer functioning. This normally means instances of war, genocide, a coup d’etat, and where crimes against humanity are taking place.
Until recently, no laws existed specifically to stop the destruction of nature in all contexts. But what if we did hold private businesses and governments to account when they were responsible for major environmental harm? What if you could prosecute a CEO or national leader on the grounds of ‘ecocide’?
The term itself was officially defined in 2021 by the Independent Expert Panel on the Legal Definition of Ecocide, and Stop Ecocide International wants to see this inscribed to the Rome Statute. The campaign has found political and public support across the world, and the list of countries developing or on the cusp of passing laws which essentially look to introduce personal liability for environmental damage is rapidly growing. So, rather than fines at an organisational level, perpetrators could soon receive jail sentences.
Around the same time as Forensic Architecture’s analysis, the European Parliament voted to stop ‘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.’ To put that another way, member states have decided to criminalise cases ‘comparable to ecocide’.
Emerging from the ecological spectre of former-president and notorious Amazon deforestation and industrialisation advocate Jair Bolsonaro last year, Brazil already has an ecocide bill making its way through the legislative process. Peru, Mexico, the Netherlands, Sweden, Chile, Italy, Spain, Samoa, Vanuatu, Romania, Estonia, and Ukraine are also throwing weight behind the movement.
‘There have already been a number of initiatives to introduce ecocide legislation in the UK, including, recently, a private members’ bill introduced by Baroness Boycott,’ says Sue Miller, Head of Global Networks at Stop Ecocide International (pictured). ‘While that will automatically fall with the dissolution of parliament prior to the General Election, as the conversation around ecocide grows globally and nationally, we are optimistic that ecocide law will take its place in the UK… whether as a piece of domestic legislation or following ratification of the international law at the ICC.
‘Once in place, it will act as a powerful deterrent against the most serious acts of environmental harm by creating personal liability for the key decision-makers behind the most environmentally harmful acts,’ she continues. ‘The beauty of ecocide law is that it compliments existing environmental legislation and regulation. There should be no need for any new regulation, although government agencies and businesses are likely to want to review their practices in the light of it and adjust them, if necessary, to ensure that their activities remain within the safe boundaries.’
Here in the UK, an ecocide law could lead to criminal prosecution for the sewage and wastewater crisis wreaking devastation at coastal and inland locations. The ‘toxic cocktail’ run off from our highways, as described in a new report by the Chartered Institute for Water and Environmental Management and Stormwater Shepherds, may also be grounds for conviction. Not forgetting those responsible for 13,000 tonnes of oil spilt into the North Sea between 2018 and 2023. By nature, legislation covers a broad range of incident types and environments, and this is its strength.
‘The definition of ‘environment’ in ecocide law comprises “the earth, its biosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere, and atmosphere, as well as outer space”,’ Miller replies when we ask if ecocide could help tackle the planet’s air quality crisis. ‘Air pollution is a pervasive harm. As well as damaging public health, it contributes to environmental harm such as global warming and ocean temperature rise. These lead to the disruption we are seeing play out around the world. Indeed, habitat loss and species decline are a consequence of air pollution as much as they are consequences of other, more visible causes.’
Last year, Belgium became the first country in the world to ratify ecocide in its penal code. And even if this hadn’t happened, the country would now be working on legislation following the European Parliament vote on ‘wanton acts’. That decision means all 25 member states have until 2026 to develop and implement their own domestic laws.
Meanwhile, here in the UK, Scotland could become the first home nation to introduce similar framework if an initiative led by Scottish Labour MSP Monica Lennon (pictured) is successful in passing law under devolved powers. Speaking to Air Quality News, she points out that Scotland is one of the most nature-depleted countries on the planet, and the UK-wide picture is similarly alarming. Britain has ‘lost’ 19% of its species since 1993, and one-in-six is now considered endangered.
‘By preventing ecocide and changing the behaviours of corporations, senior decision makers and those who put nature at risk, we can free up time and resources to promote nature recovery in Scotland,’ explains Lennon, who cites Belgian law and Stop Ecocide International’s ICC framework as key blueprints. ‘By building on this example and the work of the EU… the Scottish Government and other political parties has the opportunity to support my proposals for ecocide law in [our] parliament.’
‘We are currently analysing the responses to the public consultation on my members’ Bill proposal. Ahead of drafting the legislation, I will be engaging with stakeholders to ensure that the proposals are robust and cover all aspects of the environment,’ she continues. ‘I would like to see a framework emerging that protects our environment, including the air, soil and water we depend on.’
According to Lennon, the priority is developing a framework that supports existing laws, much in the same way as Miller suggested. And to be truly ‘fit for purpose’, regulations must be able to deal with the ‘triple threat’ of climate change, nature loss, and pollution. The parliamentary bill is yet to be finalised, and the definition of ‘environment’ is likely to be a crucial factor in the response.
Should a law come to fruition, though, it could be a game-changer. Effective ecocide legislation means anywhere significant harm to nature has occurred it can be considered a criminal offence. Or that’s the expectation. How close we’ll get to that, of course, is anyone’s guess right now. Nevertheless, it’s important to recognise this as another step towards closing gaps in existing environmental laws.
