Thinking about an ‘ecocide’ law

The crime of 'Ecocide' has been proposed to be considered as the fifth international crime, along with genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court by an expert panel in 2021. The proposed definition is "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 being caused by those acts."

An orgnanisation "Stop Ecocide International" urged that any state or group of states that has ratified the Rome Statute may propose an amendment to incorporate the crime of ecocide. In December 2019, the Republic of Vanuatu urged all states parties to consider adding a fifth crime of ecocide to the Rome Statute. On 20 June 2021, the then Bangladeshi Parliamentary Committee on the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change recommended drafting a new legal framework to codify ecocide, contemplating ecocide as destructive to humankind as genocide.

Now the crucial question arises, while Vietnam, Uzbekistan, France, Russia, Belgium, and a few other states have existing ecocide laws, and similarly, Mexico, Netherlands, Italy, Brazil, UK have proposed the same, do Bangladesh need a separate ecocide legal framework? Prior to answering, a review of the existing environmental laws of Bangladesh is needed.

First, the Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act 1995 prohibits the cutting or razing of hills and filling or destroying wetlands. However, with an indistinct exception for "essential/ indispensable national interest", these prohibitions can be mitigated by the Government, ostensibly and statutorily legalising ecocide. For injury to ecosystems, civil liability lies based on the polluter pays principle (PPP) under the Act. In case of failure of payment, the Director General (DG) may file a compensatory claim suit or file a criminal case. The same Act also has some penalty provisions, but only for non-compliance with and violation of the legal directions. However, it is submitted that the penalties are not sufficient when the gravest harm in the nature of an ecocide is caused to the environment, since the penalties follow a range of imprisonment for a minimum of one year and a maximum of ten years, with or without fines. Notably, the Environment Court Act 2010, only provides the legal and jurisdictional procedures, and mechanisms for environmental justice processes.

Furthermore, the Wildlife (Conservation and Security) Act 2012, is the core legislation aimed at protecting biodiversity, forests, and wildlife. It lays down some punishment for destructive acts concerning wildlife conservation and protection. Notably, the Bangladesh Biodiversity Act 2017, was enacted after ratifying the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1994 and provides sanctions as well to protect the biodiversity.

On the other hand, laws on marine environmental protection are even more insufficient as the Marine Environment Conservation Act has not been passed yet, although drafted in 2004. We do have the Bangladesh Water Act 2013, which provides directions for the preservation and protection of water resources and prescribes penalties for the perpetrators. The Protection and Conservation of Fish Act 1950 (East Bengal Act) and the Marine Fisheries Act 2020, are not enough to punish the perpetrators whose actions, intentionally or unintentionally, enormously imperil the marine environment.

Lamentably, the above-mentioned enactments are not adequate to combat ecocide. Therefore, ecocide needs international recognition in the Rome Statute, and Bangladesh needs an ecocide law to safeguard its environment.

The writer is official contributor and a student at the Department of Law, University of Dhaka.