Proposal for Ecocide to be
the 5th International Crime Against Peace
Polly Higgins submitted to the United Nations in April 2010 the written proposal for Ecocide to be made the 5th Crime Against Peace, alongside Genocide. She set out a legal definition of the word ecocide and has created a provision that will impose a legal duty of care on all companies to place environmental considerations first.
Implementation of the crime of Ecocide will stop the flow of destruction at source and create a pre-emptive duty on corporate activity to prohibit the mass damage and destruction to ecosystems from the outset. This will create a powerful preventative measure to govern those in a superior position of responsibility – CEO’s, heads of state and heads of financial institutions – and make them responsible for the decisions that lead to, support or finance mass damage and destruction.
By levying responsibility on persons, not legal fictional entities (ie, a corporation), the cycle of destruction and accrual of silent rights (the right to pollute, the right to destroy) will end. In so doing, the protection of interests shifts from those few who have ownership to protection of all those who are at risk of Ecocide. Moreover, by legally defining Ecocide, we can re-open the currently defunct mechanism within the UN – the UN Trusteeship Council – to put in place an international mechanism based on trusteeship principles and obligations for communities most adversely affected by ecocide which in turn has rendered them non-self-governing.
The International Criminal Court was formed in 2002 to prosecute individuals for breaches of 4 Crimes Against Peace. They are: Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes and Crimes of Aggression. Ecocide has been proposed by Polly Higgins to the UN Law Commission as:
Ecocide the extensive destruction, damage to or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been severely diminished.
The Crime of Ecocide
Ecocide can arise out of human intervention: Heavy extraction, toxic dumping, mining and deforestation are all examples of mass ecocide.
The Law of Ecocide will stop damaging and destructive activity. Voluntary corporate governance, market trading and offset mechanisms have failed. By creating a Law of Ecocide we will create specific legally binding duties and responsibilities.
Ecocide is a crime of consequence. e.g where an energy company procures its energy by extracting fossil fuel, as opposed to creation from renewable energy, that would result in ecocide.
Ecocide is not a crime of intent. CEO’s do not sit in their offices plotting to destroy the Earth. It is a consequence of the pursuit of profit which arises out of destructive activity.
Ecocide creates a pre-emptive obligation. It stops the damage before it happens. A duty of reasonable care is put in place, ensuring that individual and collective (corporate, governmental and armies) responsibility is taken by those who have contractual rights over a given territory before damage or destruction of a given territory takes place.
Ecocide is preventative. It is a crime focused on preventing harm, rather than focusing on blame. This means that standards of conduct and care will be punishable in criminal court of law if and when breached.
Ecocide protects the people’s interests. The emphasis shifts from the protection of the few (corporate) to the protection of the wider Earth community – that means both people and planet gain.
Ecocide is a tool to enforce restorative justice. Instead of paying fines, restoration becomes the name of the game. Extensive restoration by those who have committed Ecocide will ensure that appropriate remedy is put in place, not merely the payment of a fine which is all too easily factored in as an external cost by those evading their responsibilities.
Ecocide creates responsibilities at international and national level. Primary responsibility to prevent, investigate and punish the crime of Ecocide sits first and foremost with the country where the activity takes place. Where a crime of Ecocide has taken place on a given territory, and that country is unwilling or unable to take action, then the crime will come under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. By implementing Ecocide as a crime at international level, the pressure is immediately created for the crime to be speedily implemented at national level. It’s a very effective top-down approach.
Ecocide sends a powerful global message to the world, not just to those involved in business or during war, to take responsibility for the well being of all life.
Ecocide is a Crime Against Peace.
In short….
10 reasons why
1. Stop ecocideand we stop the mass destruction of the planet;
2. ecocide is proposed as an international law which applies to all people and all nations;
3. which will rapidly become a national duty of care as well when each country has to put in place parallel laws;
4. governments, corporations, organisations, and any person who has rights over a territory will have an over-riding legally binding obligationto ensure their actions do not give rise to damage, destruction or loss of ecosystems;
5. action can be taken against any human person, not the fictional person (the corporation). As an international crime against peace, no-one escapes liability;
6. we already have the international court structure in place to prosecute ecocide. The International Criminal Court was created in 2002;
7. ecocide creates a strong legal burden of responsibility to ensure prevention;
8. restoration will take precedence over simple payment of fines;
9. the Law of Ecocide will ensure a shift from personal interest to public, environmental and society interests;
10. Peace.
Ecocide, the missing 5th Crime Against Peace, is a crime against nature and humanity
Where territory is destroyed (over a certain size, duration and impact), it is not only the land and all that grows there that is lost, it is also the homeland of others. Inhabitants, both human and non-human, have the right to peace: destroy our land and we destroy ourselves. Destroy the land of others and we leave less for the rest.
Capitalism and corporations cannot continue to use their vast power promoting policies that are at cross purposes to humanities long term survivability and earth’s sustainable ecosystems. Allowing C&C to continue the present course will ultimately force humanity to step across the door step of doom. We have created nothing less than “Robots” with a license to kill. Capitalism, Corporations and humanity must pursue long term sustainability/survivability with shared enthusiasm.
I think nearly everyone looks back in their lives to recall fondly the state of the environment when they were children. For all it’s technological hindrances there was less stress, more connection, greater freedom generally speaking. We as a species have in the main successfully thwarted the constraints imposed by our environments of medical, climatic, water and food barriers to growth. We are at a global pop. of 6,692,030,277 and increasing exponentially and choose to live without limitations as to how we support our lives. Science is retrospective, the climate is teetering, pollution unprecedented, and we are inflicting a massive species loss, can none of you blinkered souls see the iceberg? This “solution” is a when not if solution. It bravely states the obvious that limits must be acknowledged and lived with, now is easiest later is collapse enforced. If you stand against types of agreements you stand for the stupidity of endless growth and the ruination of the ecosystems of this planet and all the myriad functions which they support.
Orwell would be impressed.
Ecocide should be a law ASAP; giving the earth a voice, allowing people to use the law & stand up against unscrupulous business ideas
Are you involved with the International Court for the Environment (ICE, http://www.environmentcourt.com )? Sounds interesting and complementary to your efforts… I pray Ecocide gets adopted as crime against peace. My 2p. In peace, Rianne
Using the law in this way is ludicrous. You can make a company responsible for what they’ve done wrong, and then improve regulatory oversight to prevent it in the future. Crucifying BP is a naive answer. As the world continues to get more populous, do any of you really think that the demand for energy will subside? We can pillory energy companies for doing harm to our society to the extent that they go bankrupt, and another will step right up to take their place. You will have achieved nothing.
Promote alternative energy sources by all means, but recognize that it the insatiable appetite for energy globally that guarantees accidents will happen (yes, in the pursuit of profits). Regulate properly, punish properly, but rest assured, destroying companies just to make a point is the stupid man’s solution. Regulate properly. That occurs at the ballot box.
To Samantha:
Spoken like a true fascist.
When you hear the pellets drop, count to ten and take a deep breath.
War should be included in your poll for the worst case of ecocide.
I like this idea. We need to give nature legal rights. I heard at the bioneers a wonderful women who is working on this. We all must take responsibility. Become aware of our carbon footprint, reduce our personal use of fossil fuels. Find peace within ourselves first. It is extremely tough… but I heard at the Aslan Institute in minnesota, USA, by having compassion for BP we improve our chances of creating the world we want for future generations
ABSOLUTELY! I am heartbroken and devastated by this reckless event motivated by a corrupt, greedy, incompetent corporation that has no regard for the natural world. BP does not even care.
It is high time that these corporations were held accountable for all their destruction
Declare Criminal Corporate War BP is the offender.
By Dwight Baker
May 24, 2010
Dbaker007@stx.rr.com
BP is a felon. BP has practiced deception and changed policies and procedures defying the rules of our Federal Government. We the People have had our borders invaded by the oil from the sea floor caused by the Deep Horizon while drilling in the Deep Mississippi trench Gulf of Mexico.
BP as a company comprised of individuals that have lied about the facts. BP has caused a rift of discontent and shown in words and deeds a frail lack of good will in and around the Gulf bordering states affected.
Now what would a good man go about doing as our President today—- knowing all those facts as they are— simple, complete with no other matter hanging out that needs discovery?
Declare Criminal Corporate War against BP, seize all their money that can be found, take in custody to be tired by a Military Tribunal the top 25 BP executives, and then do the same with the BP drilling rig employee’s in charge of operations the day the rig went down. Take in custody the government employee that allowed the vital change in the cementing phase to be changed by BP. Seize all BP software and hardware tools and equipment that comprise assets that are in place and needed to STOP THE OIL AND GAS. Make a call out for All to enlist to aid in the Military effort and then those who will not come as volunteers use the Draft for service in our Special Home Land Security Military Oil and Gas troops. Many needed are employees from companies to do the work of STOPPING THE OIL AND GAS, swear them in and bestow on them ranks in the order of their experience and importance to get the job done NOW.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunal
Hold those who destroy our planet accountable for their reckless actions!
The huge problem is that politics continues to undermine any progress towards such goals.Politicians have mastered the art of spin to the point that I doubt progress can ever be made in our current U.S. democracy. I recently wrote letters to both of my state senators (Texas is a deep red state) concerning climate legislation. Both responded with their party spin about how it would create massive job losses, drive up energy costs, and balloon the federal deficit. Just enough scare mixed with partial truth to make their argument sound legit. Meanwhile the poor Earth keeps on its fast track to hell in a hand basket. More has to be done to educate the masses, unfortunately anything short of monumental disaster falls way short. Maybe the Gulf oil spill will do the trick, but I’m scared that even that might not be enough.
It breaks my heart that it is necessary for wide scale destruction for us to learn, or even take notice of y our own doom. The fact that our political system set up to regulate things like this has and always will fail to do so. The well head in the gulf was illegal in the first place, however some clever “politics” deemed the regulations moot and allowed BP to drill in water far deeper than their dive capabilities… Yes crucify BP! they have made billions raping our world its high time they gave that back to help ease the irreparable damage that they have don! Ecocide…I pray with all my heart!
@ yaright
“To Samantha:
Spoken like a true fascist.”
Why? Because you disagree with her? That’s fine, but calling her a fascist is infantile. Grow up/
While any tool can be used for good or bad, for it’s original purpose or a newfangles one… at this stage it seems that ‘ecocide’ (and/or ‘ecoslughter’) might be a necessary tool to put to use.
(Earth too, is an island…)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_restoration
(Co-extinction involves an incalculable web of interactions…)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coextinction
E.O.Wilson’s experiments suggest life has a chance to regenerate, but not necessarily predictable, and probably over eons…
http://www.ted.com/talks/e_o_wilson_on_saving_life_on_earth.html
Even if we must inexorably stride towards some kind of “Singularity” like the one Ray Kurzweil is pushing forth towards,
or Synthetic Biology like C.Venter is trying to birth…
And even if we must admit what Heracitus realized 2500 years ago, that yes, change is the only constant…
and that yes, we shall or must “proceed,” invent, and develop knowledge and technology….
but…does it still ring true that it just might be great and wise to somehow try to preempt a severe version of the “you don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone” scenario for Life on Island Earth?
I say let us make an example of bp. why not take them down? why protect them? filthy rich bastards… but we shouldn’t stop there. when someone comes in to fill BPs shoes let them know that we mean f*cking business!
Agreed. Ecocide should be considered a Crime Against Nature and thus, a Crime Against Peace.
It saddens me deeply to know that I too am part of the problem. I drive a car, and sometimes I drive long distances. Even at 25 miles to the gallon in the city and 40 mg on the highway, it is easy to see that I continue to help prop up a system of degradation and ecocide. Beyond rising gas prices, the cost to our environment grows exponentially. For myself, and for my family, I personally pledge to drive less, thereby reducing my reliance on gasoline, and in addition, I pledge to continue to reduce my consumption of the other common products which use petroleum bases or components.
Long Live Mother Nature,
Varity Sinning
In the mid 70′s a group of us flower children tried to get an Emancipation Proclamation declared into law to protect the Earth Mother, and of course, failed miserably. I remember sneaking onto Esalen on the California coast and trying to get then Gov Jerry Brown to buy in….now after all these years and all the needless added destruction, I pray the time has come to liberate our Mother!.
I might have been able to forgive BP if they had displayed even the slightest hint of remorse over what has occured, but their lackadaisical attitude towards the greatest ecological disaster in the history of the United States is utterly appalling and the time has come for BP executives to be held accountable for their greed. If BP was a person, they’d be a sociopath and we have no problem holding sociopaths accountable for the crimes they commit. Wat BP has done is nothing short of unleashing a nightmare on the world that will take decades to correct.
We must, in the first place help the earth ourselves, and help others peacefully and lovingly – if nescesary by means of wise and clear laws – to gain the same eco-consciousness. Destroying is not helping. Help them to know, to think, to act in the right way. In all beautiful and creative, peaceful and loving ways of our spirit. They are a (sad) part of Nature that can and should be healed! Show them, in spite of everything, understanding every time again, and they will ‘get’ (obtain) understanding. Never get tired of enlightening them. The earth is not truly helped by harsh and unthoughtful actions (these will have their unwanted ‘life’ & followings) but by wise and harmonious ones.
Do we realize that any idea (towards others) we bring into life and believe in, will as much work for (or against) ourselves, in our own lives? Can all our actions bear that? Let’s not make the same mental mistake (again, like ‘they’ still do) and always always act conscious of this universal principle…
Our derailed mental world CAN change and get whole again truly, by simplicity (singleness), inspiration and true wisdom… and the sharing of it. ! All these small healed and whole ‘planets’(we!) will form at last a large WHOLE planet. Let’s KEEP care and friendship, as well as nature, ALIVE… all the time. Let’s not rest before BP (e.g.) substantially understands… and becomes our true friend. And Natures.
Consider the Earth as our child, and the Unenlighted as our other child. Why choose between them? That is an unthinkable bitter decision for responsible and loving ‘parents’……………….
Let none of them fall… choosing the Third Way.
I support the general idea of the ICCJ being given the power to prosecute instances of ecoside (appropriately formulated). I notice with amusement though that many think that Capitalism and Corporations are the only ratbags in this regard. The Soviet system and its satellites were as bad if not worse. The problem is greed, laziness, stupidity and ignorance and that exists in all societies. The mass extermination of species by human agency started at least 100,000 years ago! New Zealand where I come from is littered with toxic waste dumps, all done in the days of a command economy!
Stuart
BP should be charged with ecocide, and mass homocide- cuz that’s what’s gonna happen.
The natives has said for years to preserve the earth…now look at us.
A wise man once said “Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.”
The directors of these multi-million dollar companies and corporations intent on the destruction of our planet in return for money and power would do well to remember this.
Why do those who decry modern civilization never live far from shopping centers and why don’t they grind their coffee with a stone ax?
Cities get created when groups of people find a location that works best for them. Others are attracted to that location, because teamwork makes things easier for everyone. No one expects coffee producing companies to go out of business. No one wants corporations to fail.
We just want the people who own and run corporations to do things right. To remember that they have an obligation to treat people with care, and not do things that damage this world in which we live. Not even a corporation can survive if there are no workers left to do the work.
Interesting proposal. One problem (there are many) is that the (any) criminal justice system (so far devised) is not a very effective way of responding to anti-social (in this case, in the biospheric sense) behaviour. This is precisely why many have been advocating the use of a much more accurate and effective pricing system for “ecosystem services” (e.g. environmental and ecological economics). If applied in a much more determined and systematic way (e.g. “fees” for what are otherwise externalities not paid for especially by those who profit from them i.e. on which they profit privately at public expense), they could serve to deter ecocide and push the pricing system to be a much more accurate reflection of true/complete cost. If deterrence is the purpose of making ecocide a crime, I believe that the a fee/taxation system would be far more effective (not to mention efficient in allocating scarce public resources).
Of course we have seen very little progress on this front so far. If governments and the political will necessary to tax and charge for the real value of environmental services remains absent, the likelihood of finding the political will to enforce criminal sanctions is likely to be even more elusive.
Creating the offences themselves might be possible to gain political favour and create a facade of being serious about environmental protection (like we supposedly are about genocide – which did nothing to stop the Rwandan one for eg,) but, even where serious environmental penalties already exist (in the EPA for example), the political will to enforce them remains conspicuously weak.
‘Extensive’ is redundant, isn’t it?
Ending the finance of activities that promote ecocide is fundamental if real change for the better is to happen quickly, as it has to. Besides, case studies have shown that often when large companies make changes to their policies and production, leading to more ecologically sound practices, their profits will increase over time, see Cradle to Cradle designfor examples