从生态灭绝到生态中心主义:国际刑事法院的环境受害者概念化

IF 1.5 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Rachel Killean, Elizabeth Newton
{"title":"从生态灭绝到生态中心主义:国际刑事法院的环境受害者概念化","authors":"Rachel Killean, Elizabeth Newton","doi":"10.1177/02697580241269426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2021, an Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide launched what they described as a ‘practical and effective definition of the crime of ecocide’. The Panel expressed their hope that the ‘proposed definition might serve as the basis of consideration for an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court’. The proposed crime differs from the majority of those currently codified in the Rome Statute in that it adopts an ‘ecocentric’ understanding of harm, meaning damage to the natural environment alone is sufficient as the basis for the crime. In this article, we extend this ecocentric perspective to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC’s) victim participation and reparation regime. Drawing on emerging ecocentric legal movements, including the recognition of territories as victims of armed conflict, international rights of nature movements, environmental restorative justice, and existing juridical practice on repairing environmental harm, we consider the environmentally reparative possibilities of recognising the environment itself as a victim of a crime, with accompanying rights to participation, representation, and reparation. We argue that such recognition may enable more holistic repair in the aftermath of atrocity and could therefore be a valuable development both alongside and in the absence of a new crime of ecocide.","PeriodicalId":45622,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Victimology","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From ecocide to ecocentrism: Conceptualising environmental victimhood at the International Criminal Court\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Killean, Elizabeth Newton\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02697580241269426\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 2021, an Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide launched what they described as a ‘practical and effective definition of the crime of ecocide’. The Panel expressed their hope that the ‘proposed definition might serve as the basis of consideration for an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court’. The proposed crime differs from the majority of those currently codified in the Rome Statute in that it adopts an ‘ecocentric’ understanding of harm, meaning damage to the natural environment alone is sufficient as the basis for the crime. In this article, we extend this ecocentric perspective to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC’s) victim participation and reparation regime. Drawing on emerging ecocentric legal movements, including the recognition of territories as victims of armed conflict, international rights of nature movements, environmental restorative justice, and existing juridical practice on repairing environmental harm, we consider the environmentally reparative possibilities of recognising the environment itself as a victim of a crime, with accompanying rights to participation, representation, and reparation. We argue that such recognition may enable more holistic repair in the aftermath of atrocity and could therefore be a valuable development both alongside and in the absence of a new crime of ecocide.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45622,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Victimology\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Victimology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02697580241269426\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Victimology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02697580241269426","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2021 年,生态灭绝法律定义独立专家小组推出了他们所称的 "切实有效的生态灭绝罪定义"。专家小组表示希望 "拟议的定义可作为考虑修订《国际刑事法院罗马规约》的基础"。拟议的罪行与《罗马规约》中目前编纂的大多数罪行不同,因为它采用了对损害的 "生态中心 "理解,这意味着仅对自然环境的损害就足以作为犯罪的依据。在本文中,我们将这一生态中心主义观点延伸至国际刑事法院(ICC)的受害者参与和赔偿制度。借鉴新出现的以生态为中心的法律运动,包括承认领土为武装冲突受害者、国际自然权利运动、环境恢复性司法以及现有的修复环境损害的司法实践,我们考虑了承认环境本身为犯罪受害者的环境赔偿可能性,以及随之而来的参与权、代表权和赔偿权。我们认为,这种承认可以在暴行发生后进行更全面的修复,因此,在没有新的生态灭绝罪的情况下,也可以成为一种有价值的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From ecocide to ecocentrism: Conceptualising environmental victimhood at the International Criminal Court
In 2021, an Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide launched what they described as a ‘practical and effective definition of the crime of ecocide’. The Panel expressed their hope that the ‘proposed definition might serve as the basis of consideration for an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court’. The proposed crime differs from the majority of those currently codified in the Rome Statute in that it adopts an ‘ecocentric’ understanding of harm, meaning damage to the natural environment alone is sufficient as the basis for the crime. In this article, we extend this ecocentric perspective to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC’s) victim participation and reparation regime. Drawing on emerging ecocentric legal movements, including the recognition of territories as victims of armed conflict, international rights of nature movements, environmental restorative justice, and existing juridical practice on repairing environmental harm, we consider the environmentally reparative possibilities of recognising the environment itself as a victim of a crime, with accompanying rights to participation, representation, and reparation. We argue that such recognition may enable more holistic repair in the aftermath of atrocity and could therefore be a valuable development both alongside and in the absence of a new crime of ecocide.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Review of Victimology
International Review of Victimology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
30
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信