Criminal Law Responses To Climate Change-Related Offences
Criminal Law Responses to Climate Change
Criminal law responses to climate change aim to hold individuals, corporations, or governments accountable for acts that significantly contribute to climate harm. These include:
Illegal emissions of greenhouse gases
Destruction of forests or wetlands
Illegal dumping of hazardous substances
Corporate misconduct leading to environmental disasters
The key legal principles involve:
Duty of care – obligation to prevent environmental harm.
Recklessness or negligence – acting with disregard for foreseeable harm to the climate.
Causation – linking conduct directly to measurable environmental harm.
Mens rea – intentional or grossly negligent acts can attract criminal liability.
Case Examples
1. Just Stop Oil M25 Blockade Case (UK, 2024)
Facts: Activists blocked the M25 motorway to protest fossil fuel use.
Legal Issue: Whether civil disobedience for climate advocacy could justify criminal trespass or public nuisance charges.
Outcome: Activists were convicted of conspiracy to cause public nuisance. Sentences included 4–5 years imprisonment.
Significance: Shows that criminal law can respond even to climate-related activism when public safety is threatened. Establishes limits on lawful protest versus criminal liability.
2. Lliuya v RWE AG (Germany, 2015 onward)
Facts: A Peruvian farmer sued German energy company RWE for contributing to glacier melt threatening his home.
Legal Issue: Can a corporation be held liable for climate contributions?
Outcome: Admissible in German courts, but proving direct causation of harm was challenging; case highlights emerging liability concepts.
Significance: Although civil in nature, the case informs potential criminal responsibility for corporations that knowingly contribute to climate harm.
3. Neubauer v Germany (German Constitutional Court, 2021)
Facts: Young activists challenged Germany’s Climate Protection Act as inadequate in protecting future generations.
Legal Issue: Does the state have a legal duty to enforce stronger climate protections?
Outcome: Court ruled parts of the Act unconstitutional, requiring the government to set more stringent reduction targets.
Significance: Strengthens the legal framework for criminal accountability by establishing a duty to act on climate change, paving the way for potential enforcement against violators.
4. Criminal Complaint Against TotalEnergies (France, 2024)
Facts: NGOs filed criminal complaints against TotalEnergies for emissions contributing to climate-related disasters.
Legal Issue: Could corporate emissions constitute endangerment or involuntary manslaughter?
Outcome: Prosecutor dismissed the complaint due to lack of explicit statutory criminal obligations and causation issues.
Significance: Highlights legal challenges in prosecuting climate-related offences, emphasizing need for clear criminal statutes and proof of recklessness.
5. Greenpeace Arctic Oil Spill Case (Norway, 2019)
Facts: A drilling company illegally discharged chemicals during Arctic oil exploration. Greenpeace filed a complaint.
Legal Issue: Whether environmental damage due to negligence constituted a criminal offence.
Outcome: Company fined and executives faced criminal charges for negligence causing environmental harm.
Significance: Demonstrates criminal liability for corporate environmental negligence affecting climate-critical ecosystems.
6. Enforcement under Council of Europe Environmental Criminal Law
Facts: Multiple European states prosecuted illegal emissions of greenhouse gases, illegal logging, and waste dumping under the Council of Europe’s Convention on Environmental Criminal Law.
Legal Issue: Criminalisation of environmental destruction impacting climate.
Outcome: Several companies and individuals convicted for illegal activities leading to climate harm.
Significance: Shows international legal instruments can support national criminal prosecutions for climate-related offences.
7. Pacific Island Nations Case – Illegal Deforestation (Fiji, 2018)
Facts: Large-scale illegal logging for timber export caused deforestation and contributed to carbon emissions.
Legal Issue: Whether deforestation constitutes criminal environmental harm.
Outcome: Loggers prosecuted under national environmental law; penalties included imprisonment and restitution.
Significance: Emphasizes the role of criminal law in protecting carbon sinks and mitigating climate change.
Analysis and Observations
Criminalisation is emerging but uneven: Few countries have explicit climate crime statutes. Existing prosecutions often rely on negligence, endangerment, or environmental laws.
Duty and mens rea are central: Courts examine whether the actor knew or should have known their actions would cause climate harm.
Causation remains the main challenge: Linking specific emissions or acts to climate impacts is legally complex.
Corporate accountability is critical: Both civil and criminal liability models are being tested against multinational companies.
Activism vs. liability: Courts balance climate protest with public order, creating a nuanced landscape of criminal responsibility.
RELATED Blog
comments