Prosecuting Ecological Destruction: Comparative Legal Perspectives on the Crime of Ecocide

This article aims to analyze and compare legal frameworks addressing the crime of ecocide across various jurisdictions and assess the prospects for its codification and enforcement at the international level. A scientific narrative review method was employed using a descriptive analytical approach. The study examined legal documents, policy papers, legislative reforms, and scholarly literature published between 2018 and 2024, focusing on national and international efforts to define and operationalize ecocide. Materials were selected based on relevance to legal recognition, procedural challenges, and implementation strategies. Comparative analysis was used to highlight regional developments, legal models, and conceptual trends across European, Latin American, Asia-Pacific, African, and Anglo-American legal systems. The review reveals that while several jurisdictions have initiated legislative efforts to criminalize ecocide, there is significant variation in definitions, legal scope, and prosecutorial mechanisms. European states, particularly France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, show growing support for ecocide through national reforms and backing for international initiatives. Latin American and indigenous legal systems emphasize ecocentric values and recognize the rights of nature, providing a philosophical foundation for ecocide legislation. In contrast, Asia-Pacific and African countries face enforcement limitations due to economic dependency and institutional gaps, although some constitutional and regional frameworks offer supportive structures. Common law jurisdictions exhibit cautious progress, with civil society playing a pivotal role in advancing the discourse. At the international level, efforts to include ecocide in the Rome Statute face procedural and political barriers, yet continue to shape global environmental law debates. Ecocide is emerging as a crucial legal response to large-scale environmental destruction, but its successful implementation requires harmonized legal definitions, international cooperation, and integration into both public and corporate accountability frameworks.