![]() ![]() It continues by arguing that, because various normative systems are applicable to the facts, ranging from international humanitarian law, international criminal law, and international environmental law, a means of reconciling conflicts of norms will be required, and that this will be best served by an approach of complementary interpretation. This blogpost argues that the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam potentially violated prohibitions under multiple fields of international law, but that challenges will nonetheless arise in establishing criminal responsibility for those violations due to the distinct elements of the relevant criminal provisions and the heightened burden of proof on the prosecution in such cases. Accordingly, this blogpost examines how international criminal law could apply to the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam, both under existing crimes and the proposed international crime of Ecocide. For accountability, international criminal law is of central importance. However, other legal regimes also apply during armed conflicts. ![]() In the context of armed conflict, the main field of applicable law has traditionally been international humanitarian law. In the face of such threats, questions are increasingly being asked about accountability for severe environmental harm under international law. ![]() The images of flooded tracts of land are reminiscent of the apocalyptic scenes created by Saddam Hussein’s burning of hundreds of Kuwaiti oil wells during the 1990-1991 First Gulf War, albeit with inundation replacing immolation. The destruction of the Kakhovka Dam in south-eastern Ukraine in early June 2023 and the consequent damage to housing and flooding of tens of thousands of hectares of land, is reportedly causing severe harm to humans and nature. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |