Report on the Integration of Environmental Destruction into International Criminal Law

Executive Summary

This report examines the ongoing international discourse regarding the classification of environmental destruction as a crime against humanity. It analyzes the historical context, current legal frameworks, and the significant opportunity presented by the negotiation of a new United Nations treaty. The report emphasizes the critical link between establishing legal accountability for environmental harm and the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and goals related to human well-being.

The Nexus Between Environmental Accountability and Sustainable Development

The call to recognize environmental destruction as a mass harm aligns directly with the principles of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Current international mechanisms, including the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), have jurisdictional and practical limitations in addressing large-scale environmental damage. The negotiation of a new treaty on crimes against humanity offers a critical opportunity to close this accountability gap, thereby reinforcing several SDGs.

Strengthening SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The primary objective of the proposed legal reform is to strengthen international justice mechanisms, a core target of SDG 16.

• By codifying environmental destruction as a crime against humanity, the international community can promote the rule of law at the international level (Target 16.3).
• This creates a clear legal basis for prosecuting acts that cause mass environmental harm, ensuring accountability for perpetrators and providing justice for affected communities.
• Examples such as the draining of the Mesopotamian Marshes and the attack on the Kakhovka Dam illustrate deliberate acts of environmental destruction that have gone largely unpunished, highlighting a weakness in global governance that the new treaty could address.

Protecting Planetary Health: A Foundation for SDGs 13, 14, and 15

Acts of mass environmental destruction represent direct attacks on the global commons and undermine efforts to achieve environmental sustainability goals.

1. SDG 13 (Climate Action): The deliberate destruction of vital ecosystems, such as marshes and forests, diminishes the planet’s capacity to absorb carbon and exacerbates climate change.
2. SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land): The destruction of the Mesopotamian Marshes decimated a vital wetland ecosystem, impacting biodiversity and displacing the Marsh Arabs. Such acts directly contravene the objectives of conserving and restoring terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems.

Safeguarding Human Well-being: Interlinkages with SDGs 3, 6, and 11

Environmental integrity is intrinsically linked to human health, security, and prosperity. The UN General Assembly’s recognition of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment (Resolution 76/300) underscores this connection.

• SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being): Environmental degradation leads to pollution and the loss of natural resources, threatening human health.
• SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation): Attacks on water infrastructure like the Kakhovka Dam directly threaten access to clean water for civilian populations.
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): Environmental catastrophes displace communities and destroy the natural environment upon which human settlements depend.

Historical Context and the Case for Codification

Evolution of Legal Thought

Efforts to criminalize environmental harm date back nearly 40 years. A proposal to include it as a crime against humanity in the ILC’s 1996 Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind was narrowly defeated. The primary objections at the time included:

1. A perceived lack of precision in legal drafting.
2. The view that environmental offenses were not serious enough for inclusion as core international crimes.
3. A belief that international environmental law was insufficiently developed.
4. A lack of political will among states.

Today, the escalating environmental crisis and the development of international human rights law have rendered most of these objections obsolete. The gravity of environmental harm is now widely recognized, and a robust body of law affirms the link between environmental protection and human rights.

The Proposed Amendment

The current momentum favors adding environmental harm as a 12th enumerated act to Article 2(1) of the ILC’s 2019 Draft Articles. A concrete proposal from the IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law suggests criminalizing the “widespread, long-lasting, or severe destruction of the natural environment as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any civilian population.” An explicit provision offers distinct advantages over reinterpreting existing articles, as it provides legal clarity and strengthens due process protections.

Conclusion and Recommendation

The negotiation of a new treaty on crimes against humanity presents a historic opportunity to align international criminal law with the urgent realities of the 21st century and the ambitions of the Sustainable Development Goals. Explicitly criminalizing environmental destruction would not only address a significant gap in international law but also create a powerful deterrent against acts that “deeply shock the conscience of humanity.”

It is recommended that as States proceed with treaty negotiations, they give serious consideration to incorporating environmental destruction as a crime against humanity. This action is a logical and necessary step to uphold justice, protect the planet, and ensure a sustainable and peaceful future for all, in direct support of the 2030 Agenda.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article’s core focus is on strengthening international law to prevent and punish environmental destruction as a “crime against humanity.” This involves creating a new UN treaty, amending existing legal frameworks like the Rome Statute, and establishing accountability mechanisms through institutions like the International Criminal Court (ICC). This directly relates to promoting the rule of law and building effective, accountable institutions at all levels.

• SDG 15: Life on Land

  The article explicitly discusses the “widespread, long-lasting, or severe destruction of the natural environment.” It provides examples like the draining of southern Iraq’s Mesopotamian Marshes, which destroyed a vital ecosystem, and scorched earth tactics. The push to criminalize “ecocide” is fundamentally about protecting terrestrial ecosystems and halting biodiversity loss caused by deliberate human actions.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The consequences of environmental destruction on human populations are a key theme. The draining of the Mesopotamian Marshes led to the displacement of “hundreds of thousands” of Marsh Arabs and the decimation of their culture. Russia’s attacks on the Kakhovka Dam and Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant are cited as actions causing “untold suffering to a civilian population,” directly threatening the safety and resilience of human settlements.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  The examples of the Mesopotamian Marshes (a vital wetland ecosystem) and the Kakhovka Dam directly involve the destruction of critical water resources and water-related ecosystems. Protecting these resources from deliberate harm is essential for ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article links environmental protection to human rights, citing the UN General Assembly resolution recognizing “the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a human right.” Environmental destruction leads to “untold suffering” and threatens human survival, directly impacting the well-being of affected populations.

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  While not the primary focus, the article connects the legal discussion to the broader environmental crisis by referencing the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion on “Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change.” Large-scale environmental destruction, such as deforestation or the destruction of wetlands, has significant implications for climate regulation, linking the issue of ecocide to urgent climate action.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: “Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.” The entire article is an argument for strengthening the international rule of law by creating a new treaty to prosecute environmental destruction as a crime against humanity, thereby providing a path to justice for affected communities.
   • Target 16.a: “Strengthen relevant national institutions… to prevent violence and combat… crime.” A new international treaty would necessitate that signatory states develop and strengthen their own legal and judicial systems to prosecute these crimes.

2. SDG 15: Life on Land

   • Target 15.1: “ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services…” The call to criminalize the destruction of ecosystems like the Mesopotamian Marshes is a direct effort to enforce their conservation.
   • Target 15.5: “Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity…” The proposed crime of “widespread, long-lasting, or severe destruction of the natural environment” is a legal mechanism aimed at halting the most extreme forms of habitat degradation.

3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • Target 11.5: “significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected… caused by disasters…” The article discusses human-made disasters, such as the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam, and their devastating impact on civilian populations, including displacement. Criminalizing such acts aims to prevent these disasters and protect communities.

4. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

   • Target 6.6: “protect and restore water-related ecosystems, including… wetlands, rivers…” The article’s example of the deliberate draining of the Mesopotamian Marshes highlights the need for legal protections for such critical water-related ecosystems.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Adoption of International Legal Instruments (Implied)

  The primary measure of progress discussed is the successful negotiation and adoption of a “new United Nations treaty on crimes against humanity” that explicitly includes environmental destruction. The existence of such a treaty would be a direct indicator of progress towards Target 16.3 (promoting the rule of law at the international level).

• Number of Prosecutions for Environmental Crimes (Implied)

  The article focuses on creating legal avenues for accountability, such as prosecutions before the ICC or national courts under the new treaty. An increase in investigations and successful prosecutions of individuals responsible for “ecocide” would serve as an indicator of “equal access to justice” (Target 16.3) and the effectiveness of the new legal framework.

• National Legislation and Policy Changes (Implied)

  The article mentions that the right to a healthy environment is recognized in the legislation of over 125 states. Progress could be measured by the number of additional states that codify environmental destruction as a serious crime in their national laws, in line with the proposed international treaty, contributing to Target 16.a.

• Reduction in Incidents of Deliberate Environmental Destruction (Implied)

  The ultimate goal of criminalizing these acts is deterrence. A reduction in the number and scale of incidents like the draining of the Mesopotamian Marshes or attacks on infrastructure like the Kakhovka Dam would be a key indicator of success in protecting ecosystems (Target 15.5) and communities (Target 11.5).

• Reduction in Population Displacement from Environmental Destruction (Implied)

  The article notes that the destruction of the Mesopotamian Marshes displaced “hundreds of thousands.” A measurable indicator of progress would be a decrease in the number of people forcibly displaced due to deliberate, large-scale environmental harm, relating to Target 11.5.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: justsecurity.org