Abstract
‘Ecocide’ was first used by Professor Arthur W. Galston in 1970 at the Conference on War and National Responsibility, to describe the effects of ‘Agent Orange’, a defoliant chemical. Some 80 million litres were sprayed over 2.6 million hectares of forest during the Vietnam War, causing utmost devastation to human and ecological life, the consequences of which are still felt by generations in Vietnam shaped by that historical exposure. Unlike Agent Orange, where the impact on human and ecological life was intentional during war and localised, ecocide presents itself in various forms, with tendencies of negligence, multinational effects, occurring during peacetime or standard corporate and State practices. The international legal system glaringly lacks an adequate framework to tackle this widespread destruction. Globally, climate change is already crossing multiple tipping points, which would lead to humanity facing a “potentially catastrophic, irreversible outcome”. International environmental law currently relies on soft law, entailing non-legally binding provisions. Various treaties, such as the Paris Agreement, depend on voluntary member cooperation, and on State responsibility providing reparations and compensation. Moreover, the Rome Statute, the fundamental treaty governing the International Criminal Court, addresses environmental harm merely when it is caused by or during armed conflict, thereby neglecting ecocide and devastation caused by factors such as deforestation, oil spills, hydraulic fracturing, water and soil contamination, and industrial pollution. This study argues that the criminalisation of ecocide is essential for addressing the needs of present and future generations, regardless of the challenges such an action may pose.