Considering that we can't get the two biggest nations and greenhouse gas emitters in the world to agree on actually doing anything about climate change, getting the crime
of ecocide enshrined into international law, let alone actually enforcing it, may seem far - fetched.
asks how do humans, and their creations, adapt to uncontrollable environmental changes after centuries
of ecocide?
I noticed an article first published in Socialist Lawyer that envisions putting the head of the current Olympics into the dock because he gave committers
of ecocide awards for being green.
Not exact matches
We Homo sapiens are witnessing the greatest annihilation
of species in the last 65 million years, and our children may live to witness
ecocide with their own eyes.
In a three - page statement, the «criminal» history
of America since 1492 is recounted in terms
of theft, «
ecocide,» rape (two times), colonization (five times), racism (four times), slavery (seven times), exploitation (eight times), and genocide (nine times).
On December 3, 2015, international organizations such as the Organic Consumers Association, IFOAM International Organics, Navdanya, Regenration International, Millions Against Monsanto and dozens
of other organizations announced that they will sue Monsanto for its crimes against nature and humanity, and
ecocide in The Hague, Netherlands on World Food Day next year.
We are particularly concerned about
ecocide and the pollution
of rivers and river beds from mining which has rendered a lot
of drinking water unsafe.
Greenwashing by the public relations industry has all but camouflaged the unprecedented historical outcomes
of planetary genocide,
ecocide, zoocide and epistemicide.
Economics
of War and Peace — Land and resource wars; financial domination; US foreign policy;
ecocide; shifting from «full spectrum dominance» to full spectrum sharing; the money question; religious conflicts; resource rent for public revenue; geo - confederation for conflictzones; earth rights democracy.
Find out about the campaign to prosecuton
ecocide under the mandate
of the International Criminal Court at http://www.eradicatingecocide.com
How extensive must the damage to the web
of life on our planet be before we recognized it as criminal, as
ecocide and pursue criminal prosecution.
Some person needs to organize a discussion
of saving the Earth from
ecocide and extinction by 1.
Then, the key line
of that speech appeared: «Si nosotros mandamos a la basura el Protocol de Kyoto, seriamos responsables de econocidio, ecocidio, y genocidio» (If we toss the Kyoto Protocol in the garbage, we would be responsible for econocide,
ecocide, and genocide).
Is «ascertainable
ecocide» (deforestation, oil spills, fossil fuel extraction, pollution - dumping) a problem for «the inhabitants
of [a] territory», if it is not the case that «peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants
of that territory have been severely diminished»?
So in order to cope with this problem, Higgins makes a distinction between «ascertainable
ecocide»: deforestation, oil spills, fossil fuel extraction, pollution - dumping; and non-ascertainable
ecocide: tsunami, earthquake, typhoon, Act
of God.
The line
of interest here is that
ecocide is caused «by human agency or by other causes», but it's only
ecocide that is»cause d by human agency» which is pertinent.
Supporters
of a new
ecocide law also believe it could be used to prosecute «climate deniers» who distort science and facts to discourage voters and politicians from taking action to tackle global warming and climate change.
The proposal for the United Nations to accept «
ecocide» as a fifth «crime against peace», which could be tried at the International Criminal Court (ICC), is the brainchild
of British lawyer - turned - campaigner Polly Higgins.
As former Bolivian Ambassadar to the UN, Pablo Solon said at last week's Wolpe Memorial Lecture, «The COP17 will be remembered as a place
of premeditated genocide and
ecocide.»
Cap and trade, taxing CO2, direct subsidies or combinations
of all three might work; prohibiting «
ecocide» isn't likely to make a positive difference.
Likewise, prohibiting «
ecocide» would most likely be enforced only in the EU and US (and some others), further enhancing the competitive advantage
of China and India.
I admit that going into Eradicating
Ecocide I was inclined to agree with Higgins — part out
of personal inclination and part because nearly a year ago Polly and I sat down in Copenhagen for coffee to discuss the topic and she made a compelling case then — but just in the 200 pages presented here she does a great job examining both the historical situation which gave rise to corporate personhood and early attempts to stop pollution, more modern examples (many
of which have been be well documented on TreeHugger, they being so current), and makes a good moral and logical argument that the only way we are going to truly stop
ecocide is to make it a serious crime.
To get to the point where the majority
of people think
ecocide is wrong is going to take a transition, which is where Higgins stands out, advocating several steps towards legal abolition
of the sort
of pollution we now see as commonplace.
Higgins suggests the following definition for
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 the that territory has been severely diminished.
The movement to make
ecocide a crime against peace under international law, led by UK - based lawyer Polly Higgins, as well as efforts to grant legal rights to Mother Earth, such as Bolivia has done, is exactly where we need to be going in terms
of the highest level
of environmental thinking: Recognizing that destroying whole swaths
of the planet, with little to no concern for the effect on all the creatures that live upon it, is not just unethical, unacceptable behavior, but is also a crime, a crime against humanity, a crime against life itself.