Transitional Justice Mechanisms in Combating Ecocide: Protecting Vulnerable Communities

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Law and Political Science, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Law and Political Science, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Department of International Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction
Ecocide refers to deliberate, widespread, and systematic environmental destruction that has undeniable detrimental impacts on ecosystems and human communities, particularly Indigenous populations. This phenomenon carries irreparable consequences for vulnerable peoples whose identity, culture, and livelihood are intrinsically linked to nature. As environmental crises—including climate change and natural resource depletion—continue to escalate, the necessity of addressing legal responsibilities regarding ecocide becomes increasingly urgent. Transitional justice mechanisms can serve as effective instruments for responding to intentional and large-scale environmental degradation. These mechanisms not only contribute to the rehabilitation of damaged ecosystems but also protect communities that have lived in direct connection with nature, especially vulnerable populations. This research aims to examine the application of transitional justice mechanisms in response to ecocide and the compensation for resulting damages, with particular emphasis on protecting vulnerable communities.
 
Method
This research employs a descriptive-analytical approach, utilizing library resources and international documents. Initially, the theoretical and conceptual foundations of ecocide and transitional justice are examined, followed by an analysis of the five transitional justice mechanisms—truth-seeking, justice, reparations, reconciliation, and guarantees of non-recurrence—in relation to addressing ecocide. Additionally, successful applications of these mechanisms in international cases—such as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster, the Chevron case in Ecuador, and the Mariana mine disaster in Brazil—are studied. To elucidate the relationship between ecocide and the social death of Indigenous communities, case studies including the James Bay hydroelectric project in Canada, the Maralinga nuclear tests in Australia, and the destruction of the Amazon rainforests in Brazil are investigated.
 
Findings
Research findings indicate that the five transitional justice mechanisms, in combating ecocide, function not in isolation but in dynamic and complementary interaction. Each mechanism plays a distinct yet complementary role in the process of rebuilding and rehabilitating vulnerable communities. Truth-seeking, through the documentation and narration of environmental damages, establishes the groundwork for implementing justice. Justice, by establishing accountability, defines the legal framework necessary for compensation. Reparations, by remedying damages inflicted upon ecosystems, serve as prerequisites for sustainable reconciliation. Reconciliation, by rebuilding the damaged human–nature relationship, provides the foundation for structural changes. Guarantees of non-recurrence, through institutional reform, ensure the sustainability of achievements from the other pillars.
Furthermore, the research identifies three fundamental challenges in applying transitional justice mechanisms to the domain of ecocide: the absence of a coherent legal framework, the lack of coordination between national and international mechanisms, and the marginalization of local communities and Indigenous knowledge. In response to these challenges, solutions such as developing an international framework for defining and criminalizing ecocide, establishing a specialized international environmental court, designing hybrid environmental tribunals, and implementing participatory truth-seeking systems are proposed.

Conclusion
The analyses conducted in this study demonstrate that the concept of ecocide necessitates a fundamental revision of current legal and policy structures. Transitional justice, with its five mechanisms, can provide an appropriate and efficient framework for addressing this challenge. The integration of Indigenous knowledge with modern legal systems and the active participation of vulnerable communities in all decision-making stages are key elements of this approach. Additionally, coordination between national and international levels is essential for confronting the transboundary nature of environmental degradation. International experiences indicate the feasibility of this approach; however, its full realization requires redefining concepts such as victim, responsibility, and compensation in the environmental domain. In this redefinition, the environment must be recognized as an entity with inherent rights, and future generations must be incorporated into calculations of justice. Environmental transitional justice can facilitate the transition from a state of passivity to active participation in environmental protection by strengthening communities' sense of agency. This path not only leads to the remediation of past damages but also establishes a novel model of sustainable coexistence between humans and nature.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

References
Akhavan, P. (2022). Criminal Justice in Transition Era: Objectives, Challenges and Solutions, in Transitional Justice Lectures, Tehran: Iran Academia, 58-65 [In Persian].
Arctic Council (2021). Indigenous Environmental Monitoring Program: Annual Report 2021, Tromsø: Arctic Council Secretariat.
Bahreini, R. (2022). Reconciliation in Transitional Justice: Beyond Forgetting and Forgiving, in Transitional Justice Lectures, Tehran: Iran Academia, 93-102 [In Persian].
Costa Rican Ministry of Environment (2022). Reconciliation with Nature Program: Annual Report 2021, San José: Government of Costa Rica, 45-67.
Faryadi, M. (2023). Waste Production Reduction in Iranian Environmental Law, Journal of Legal Studies, 15(1), 263-292 [In Persian].
Firouzi, M., & Aghaei, M. (2023). Social and Cultural Impacts of Ecocide on Indigenous Communities, Environmental Studies Quarterly, 15(2), 85-102 [In Persian].
Gillett, A. (2023). Ecocide and Cultural Destruction: The Impact of Environmental Damage on Indigenous Communities, International Journal of Human Rights, 27(2), 240-258.
Green Climate Fund (2024). Annual report 2023: Accelerating climate action for developing countries. https://www.greenclimate.fund/document/annual-report-2023
Higgins, P. (2010). Eradicating Ecocide: Laws and Governance to Prevent the Destruction of Our Planet, London: Shepheard-Walwyn Publishers, 62-78.
Higgins, P., Short, D., & South, N. (2022). Protecting the Planet: A Proposal for a Law of Ecocide, Crime, Law and Social Change, 59(3), 45-58.
ICC Office of the Prosecutor (2016). Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritization, The Hague: International Criminal Court, 14.
Jessberger, F. (2022). Hybrid Courts and Transitional Justice: Lessons from Sierra Leone and Cambodia, International Criminal Law Review, 24(2), 35-54.
Karimi, M. (2023). Conceptual Developments of Ecocide in International Documents, Environmental Law Quarterly, 14(3), 153-165 [In Persian].
Lemkin, R. (1944). Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress, Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 79-95.
Mehta, S., & Merz, P. (2024). Ecocide as the Fifth International Crime: Legal Developments and Challenges, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 22(1), 15-32.
Mohammadi, H., & Ahmadi, S. (2022). Responsibility of Multinational Corporations for Environmental Violations, International Law Studies Quarterly, 12(1), 55-78 [In Persian].
Murdock, E. G. (2018). Storied with Land: Transitional Justice on Indigenous Lands, Journal of Global Ethics, 14(2), 212-231.
Naderi, M. (2021). Application of Transitional Justice Mechanisms in Environmental Protection, Human Rights Quarterly, 92-110 [In Persian].
Naghibi, M. (2022). Five Pillars of Transitional Justice, in Transitional Justice Lectures, Tehran: Iran Academia, 38-112 [In Persian].
Nagy, R. (2008). Transitional Justice as Global Project: Critical Reflections, Third World Quarterly, 29(2), 275-289.
New Zealand Ministry for the Environment (2011). Environmental Courts and Tribunals: A Guide for Policy Makers, Wellington: Government of New Zealand, 15-18.
Norouzi, M., & Eskandari Khoshgoo, M. (2024). Explaining the Function of Blockchain Technology in International Environmental Law; With Emphasis on Combating Climate Change, Journal of Legal Studies, 16(3), 425-462 [In Persian].
OHCHR (2014). Transitional Justice and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, New York and Geneva: United Nations, 6-7.
Ramezani Ghavamabadi, M. H., & Sadeghi, M. (2023). Challenges of Proving Causation in Environmental Claims, Public Law Research Quarterly, 25(3), 185-210 [In Persian].
Ranapia, T., Jones, C., & Walker, E. (2022). Cultural-Ecological Restoration of Māori Sacred Sites: Outcomes and Challenges, Environmental Conservation, 49(1), 1-12.
Rodeiro, M. (2020). Environmental Transformative Justice: Responding to Ecocide, The City University of New York, 143-158.
Rodeiro, M. (2024). Transformative Justice for Environmental Harms: Bridging Theory and Practice, Environmental Justice, 17(2), 124-142.
Sands, P. (2024). Principles of International Environmental Law, 5th edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 256-270.
Sharp, D. N. (2014). Justice and Economic Violence in Transition, New York: Springer, 78-92.
Sharp, D. N. (2023). Transitional Justice and Environmental Crimes: Addressing the Legacy of Ecological Destruction, International Journal of Transitional Justice, 17(3), 132-145.
Tshiamala Banungana, C. (2022). Conceptualizing Ecocide: Legal and Ethical Dimensions, Journal of Environmental Law and Policy, 15(2), 157-178.
UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment (2023). Report on Environmental Destruction and Cultural Rights, 42-48.
UNEP (2019). Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report, Nairobi: United Nations Environment Program, 87-89.
UNESCO (2022). Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger, Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
Ziaei, S. Y., & Rashidi, M. (2021). Nature and Content of the Obligation to Assess Environmental Impacts in the Light of the International Court of Justice Jurisprudence, Journal of Legal Studies, 13(3), 131-160 [In Persian].
 
Documents
Ecuadorian Constitution (2008). Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador, Quito: Government of Ecuador, Articles 71-74.
Fundação Renova v. Estado de Minas Gerais (2023). Brazilian Federal Court of Appeals, Case No.0122078-21.2016.4.02.0000, 17-18.
IBAMA v. Samarco Mineração (2016). Brazilian Federal Court, Case ‌No. 0060017-58.2015.4.01.3400, 23-24.
Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell (2021). District Court of The Hague, Case No. C/09/571932/HA ZA 19-379, Judgment of 26 May 2021, para. 4.4.49.
Protocol I (1977). Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, Article 32.
UN Doc. A/69/518 (2014). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-recurrence, para. 27.
UN Doc. A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1 (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.
UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9 (1998). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
UN Doc. A/HRC/21/46 (2012). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-recurrence, 7-8.
UN Doc. A/HRC/43/53 (2020). Report of the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment.
UN Doc. A/RES/260(III) (1948). Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
UN Doc. A/RES/48/134 (1993). Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (The Paris Principles), para. 3.
UN Doc. A/RES/60/147 (2005). Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law.
UN Doc. A/RES/61/295 (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Article 18.
UN Doc. E/CN.15/2002/5/Add.1 (2002). Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programs in Criminal Matters.
UN Doc. E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1 (2005). Updated Set of Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights through Action to Combat Impunity, Principles 2 and 19.
UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1 (2015). Paris Agreement, Article 2.
UN Doc. S/2004/616 (2004). The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-conflict Societies: Report of the Secretary-General, para. 8.
 
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics