Full text loading...
This article provides an immanent critique of the legal and philosophical concept of ecocide, defined as large-scale environmental destruction. Four core contradictions in current legislative proposals are identified: the conceptual divide between humans and nature, the tension between ecocentric intentions and anthropocentric legal frameworks, the conflict between intrinsic and instrumental valuations of nature, and the mismatch between broad ecological causality and narrow legal causality. These contradictions undermine the coherence and legal viability of ecocide as a criminal offense, and reflect deeper ontological and normative conflicts between environmental ethics and legal structures. While some tensions are inherent to translating normative ideals into legal language, others – such as the inadequate conceptualization of nature – are resolvable. Addressing the surmountable contradictions strengthens the legal codification of ecocide and enhances its normative value. Although criminal law may not fully accommodate ecocentric ideals, it can still contribute to environmental protection, provided its limitations are acknowledged.