{"id":118676,"date":"2023-06-29T18:01:03","date_gmt":"2023-06-29T16:01:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/?p=118676"},"modified":"2023-07-07T12:24:53","modified_gmt":"2023-07-07T10:24:53","slug":"dam-ukraine-ecocide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/118676-dam-ukraine-ecocide.html","title":{"rendered":"A dam in Ukraine and the question of ecocide"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam in Southern Ukraine early June has been described as ecocide by Ukrainian authorities who accused Russia of being responsible for an action that caused massive environmental damage. Ukraine \u2013 as well as Russia \u2013 is among the few countries where the crime of ecocide<\/a> exists in national legislation. In this podcast by our partners at Asymmetrical Haircuts, Daphne Yuqing Liu from Ukraine-based NGO Global Rights Compliance explains the dual approach by Ukraine\u2019s Office of the Prosecutor consisting in prosecuting environmental crimes as war crimes and, sometimes, as ecocide too. Ukraine\u2019s environmental prosecutors are involved in at least 190 war crimes cases where the environment was damaged, she says, and 13 of them have ecocide listed as a potential charge. This is what happens at the national level but why ecocide should be accepted as an international crime? Kate MacKintosh, executive director of the Promise Institute for Human Rights at UCLA, has been part of an attempt to draft an international definition of ecocide. She goes back into the legal and political challenges of the effort. And make suggestions on what kind of case it may be wise to prosecute first and against whom.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

To listen to the podcast, click on the \"play\" button below:<\/em> <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n