War Torn Environment: Interpreting the Legal Threshold

Hulme, Karen

doi:10.1163/9789047405344

Cited by 29 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the Understanding Regarding Article I ENMOD, 'widespread' means an area of about several hundred square kilometres, 'long lasting' is a period of months, approximately a season, while 'severe' refers to a serious or significant disruption or harm to human life, natural and economic resources, or other assets. In contrast, Karen Hulme suggested that 'widespread' could mean several tens of thousands of kilometres, 185 'long-term' could be decades with a minimum of about twenty to thirty years 186 while 'severe' could be any significant disruption to human life and properties. 187 The significant differences between the Understanding to ENMOD and Hulme's proposal reinforce the nebulous meaning of these terms.…”

Section: Criminalising Ecocide As a War Crimementioning

confidence: 99%

Ecocide: The ‘Forgotten’ Legacy of Nuremberg

Adigun

2024

ZaöRV / HJIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The criminalisation of ecocide as an international crime has been a perennial issue, and some misgivings have been expressed over the idea. It has been contended that criminalising ecocide is antithetical to economic development and that the destruction of the ecosystem is not amenable to the scrutiny of the criminal justice system. In examining the viability of this argument, the article adopts a historical approach. It finds that ecocide is indeed one of the legacies of Nuremberg but was suppressed by powerful state interests. A lot of groundwork has already been laid which makes the criminalisation of ecocide feasible. The study argues that ecocide can be punished as genocide, war crime, crime against humanity, aggression, or a distinct crime.

show abstract

Section: Criminalising Ecocide As a War Crimementioning

confidence: 99%

Ecocide: The ‘Forgotten’ Legacy of Nuremberg

Adigun

2024

ZaöRV / HJIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…48 Andere Stimmen plädieren hingegen dafür, dass der Idee nach auch dolus eventualis ausreicht. 49 Durch dieses doppelte Vorsatzerfordernis sowie der Kenntnis nach Art. 30 IStGH-Statut wird die praktische Anwendung der Norm weitgehend eingeschränkt: Ein Täter handelt danach nur mit mens rea, wenn er im Voraus weiß, dass ein ausgeübter Angriff weit reichende, langfristige und schwere Schäden an der natürlichen Umwelt verursachen wird (also den Tatbestand des actus reus verwirklichen wird); subjektiv einen geringen militärischen Vorteil des Angriffs sieht, sowie bewusst zu dem Schluss kommt, dass der Angriff infolgedessen eindeutig unverhältnismäßig ist.…”

Section: Mens Reaunclassified

Umweltzerstörung im Krieg : Die Rolle des Umweltkriegsverbrechens in Art. 8 Abs. 2 lit. b (iv) IStGH-Statut am Beispiel der Angriffe auf Atomkraftwerke in der Ukraine

Wilson

2023

Frankfurt Law Review : Rechtswissenschaftliche Zeitschrift Von Studierenden Der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt Am Main. 1. Jahrga

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Der Internationale Strafgerichtshof hat den Tatbestand des Art. 8 Abs. 2 lit. b (iv) IStGH-Statut („das Umweltkriegsverbrechen“) bisher noch nicht angewandt. Zahlreiche seriöse Medien berichten seit Beginn der völkerrechtswidrigen Invasion durch russische Streitkräfte in das Staatsgebiet der Ukraine von Kämpfen rund um das größte Atomkraftwerk Europas in Saporischschja. Dies rief global Furcht darüber hervor, dass es erneut zu einer Atomkatastrophe inmitten des europäischen Kontinents kommen könnte. Dieser Sachverhalt bietet Anlass für eine Diskussion über den Tatbestand des Umweltkriegsverbrechens sowie seiner Auslegungsschwierigkeiten. Anhand eines hypothetischen Sachverhalts soll veranschaulicht werden, ob das Umweltkriegsverbrechen jemals Anwendung finden kann oder ob die Menge an politischen Kompromissen in seiner Gestaltung seine Nutzbarkeit gänzlich negieren.

show abstract

“…65 One confusion has arisen, however, in that negotiating states favoured the rather outdated 1970s division of the 'natural environment' from the 'human environment' -arguing that the latter should not receive protection. 66 The result was the vague proposition that IHL protection was not afforded to man-made environmental surroundings, but this limiting language appears to have finally been excised from the discourse through the ILC's PERAC Principles -which now refer only to the 'environment'. 67 Nevertheless, the Principles still fail to include a definition.…”

Section: A the 'Environment'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using International Environmental Law to Enhance Biodiversity and Nature Conservation During Armed Conflict

Hulme

2022

Journal of International Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity and nature are severely impacted by armed conflict, particularly those fought in biodiversity-rich environments. Whether harm is caused directly by bullets and bombs, through the seepage of toxic chemicals into rivers and soils, the ground-churning tracks of tanks, or the ‘conservation vacuum’ the result is often the same — severe, possibly permanent, ecological change. International humanitarian law (IHL) has consistently come up short in delivering environmental protection on the battlefield. Can international environmental law (IEL) fare any better? The International Law Commission (ILC) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) have both submitted major new guidelines in the last two years, following more than a decade of in-depth analysis of the IHL rules governing protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict. However, neither body was able to analyse the applicability of IEL obligations during armed conflict. Several authors have more recently entered this space, but none have so far undertaken a rule-by-rule analysis and spanning such a range of treaties. This article assesses the potential of the main biodiversity and nature conservation treaties to offer further environmental protection during armed conflict. Identifying complementary IEL obligations, particularly in relation to the conduct of hostilities, could be valuable to both mirror and reinforce IHL protections, and would ensure that IEL treaty bodies and third states have a basis upon which to promote conservation work with the parties to the conflict.

show abstract

War Torn Environment: Interpreting the Legal Threshold

Cited by 29 publications

References 0 publications

Ecocide: The ‘Forgotten’ Legacy of Nuremberg

Ecocide: The ‘Forgotten’ Legacy of Nuremberg

Umweltzerstörung im Krieg : Die Rolle des Umweltkriegsverbrechens in Art. 8 Abs. 2 lit. b (iv) IStGH-Statut am Beispiel der Angriffe auf Atomkraftwerke in der Ukraine

Using International Environmental Law to Enhance Biodiversity and Nature Conservation During Armed Conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About