Abstract
Leading research is based on descriptive-analytical principles and the literature review method, which has examined the classical and modern dimensions of terrorism by considering the aspects of this emerging phenomenon. While implementing existing strategies to combat environmental terrorism, this study seeks to provide an effective strategy to combat “green terrorism” or “ecosystem” to provide an effective strategy in the light of new criminal law approaches. The leading research is strengthening practical strategies to combat green terrorism and implementing effective strategies such as environmental litigation, both nationally and internationally, considering legal means. In this regard, green criminalization as a green strategy can be considered an action to combat environmental terrorism.
TopIntroduction
The environment is increasingly understood and received as a common value and heritage of humanity in general. A value that is the duty of the whole human society to protect and safeguard, but unfortunately today, the increase of environmental damage due to non-observance of correct and clear legal rules has attracted the attention of human societies in the international and global dimensions. At the same time, environmental damage is manifested in environmental crimes. Environmental crimes, which are considered an act of harm to the environment, have a different nature than other crimes and are difficult to recognize due to their complex and multidimensional nature. Therefore, an environmental crime can be referred to as “any current or current type of leave that causes serious damage to the environment and seriously endangers human health (Schofield, 1998).”
Therefore, in general, environmental crimes are divided into two main groups according to their nature:
- a.
Crimes committed against living organisms in the environment, including humans, plant, and animal organisms.
- b.
Crimes committed against inanimate elements in the environment such as climate, soil, noise, and chemical pollution.
Therefore, the actions violate the rights and security in the field of environment in the mentioned fissures and cause severe damages. Hence, the most important action taken to threaten the environment is “environmental terrorism,” which, despite the lack of proliferation and widespread crime worldwide, can significantly impact armed conflict and nuclear and chemical experiments and irreparable damage. Will enter the body of the environment (Schofield, 1998).
Environmental terrorism, however, “refers to any act that uses toxic or hazardous substances to cause harm or threat typically to the environment of humans, animals and the natural environment to severely disrupt public order through intimidation or to cause terror”.
Environmental terrorism, like environmental warfare, involves the use of natural elements or forces as weapons. Environmental terrorists, in the name of political or ideological bias, deliberately destroy or change the environment; although such methods have been used for a long time during the war, but have recently been a successful option. They have appeared as terrorist. The end of the Cold War and the change in the face of terrorism are the most important factors contributing to the growth of these groups.
The emergence of this nascent threat has been faster than the law’s ability to react. Existing legal mechanisms for countering environmental terrorism rely on existing principles of environmental law and terrorism, which are inadequate to address this particular problem. These legal principles are not adequate to address the threat of environmental terrorism; Because A. The complex set of environmental laws does not act as ordinary criminals effectively within the framework of existing counter-terrorism strategies in countering terrorists; B. These principles do not properly fulfill the function of criminal law. However, it seems that the fight against environmental terrorism requires a new criminal law. The Ecosystem Prohibition Act, or the intentional or inadvertent manipulation or destruction of any aspect of the physical environment, provides a mechanism for punishing environmental terrorists within existing legal structures while at the same time undermining the social ugliness of such an act (Cockayne, 2007).
TopBackground And Developments
Environmental terrorism, like environmental warfare, involves the use of natural elements for conflict. Environmental terrorism involves targeting the environment itself, such as the deliberate contamination of water or agricultural resources, and using the environment as a conduit for destruction, such as releasing chemical or biological weapons into the atmosphere, the elements of the global ecosystem that have been or can be used for conflict range from complex nuclear factors to simple and efficient water energy. In this regard, the use of such factors has had devastating consequences such as mortality, physical injury, and dangerous ecological hazards (Tyler, 2014).
Key Terms in this Chapter
Public Participation and Transparency: Identified as essential conditions for “accountable governments...industrial concerns,” and organizations generally, public participation and transparency are presented by UNEP as requiring “effective protection of the human right to hold and express opinions and to seek, receive and impart ideas, etc. a right of access to appropriate, comprehensible and timely information held by governments and industrial concerns on economic and social policies regarding the sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of the environment, without imposing undue financial burdens upon the applicants and with adequate protection of privacy and business confidentiality,” and “effective judicial and administrative proceedings.” These principles are present in environmental impact assessment, laws requiring publication and access to relevant environmental data, and administrative procedures.
Polluter Pays Principle: The polluter pays principle stands for the idea that “the environmental costs of economic activities, including the cost of preventing potential harm, should be internalized rather than imposed upon society at large.” All issues related to responsibility for cost for environmental remediation and compliance with pollution control regulations involve this principle.
Equity: Defined by UNEP to include intergenerational equity—“the right of future generations to enjoy a fair level of the common patrimony”—and intragenerational equity—“the right of all people within the current generation to fair access to the current generation’s entitlement to the Earth’s natural resources”—environmental equity considers the present generation under an obligation to account for long-term impacts of activities and to act to sustain the global environment and resource base for future generations. Pollution control and resource management laws may be assessed against this principle.
Sustainable Development: Defined by the United Nations Environment Programme as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,” sustainable development may be considered together with the concepts of “integration” (development cannot be considered in isolation from sustainability) and “interdependence” (social and economic development, and environmental protection, are interdependent). Laws mandating environmental impact assessment and requiring or encouraging development to minimize environmental impacts may be assessed against this principle. The modern concept of sustainable development was discussed at the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm Conference) and the driving force behind the 1983 World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, or Bruntland Commission). In 1992, the first UN Earth Summit resulted in the Rio Declaration, Principle 3 of which reads: “The right to development must be fulfilled to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.” Sustainable development has been a core concept of international environmental discussion ever since, including at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Earth Summit 2002 AU58: The in-text citation "Earth Summit 2002" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. ) and the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Earth Summit 2012 AU59: The in-text citation "Earth Summit 2012" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. , or Rio+20).
Environmental Law: Environmental law is a collective term encompassing aspects of the law that protect the environment. A related but distinct set of regulatory regimes, now strongly influenced by environmental legal principles, focuses on managing specific natural resources, such as forests, minerals, or fisheries. Other areas, such as environmental impact assessment, may not fit neatly into either category but are nonetheless important components of environmental law. Previous research found that when environmental law reflects moral values for betterment, legal adoption is more likely to be successful, usually in well-developed regions. In less-developed states, changes in moral values are necessary for successful legal implementation when environmental law differs from moral values.
Prevention: The concept of prevention etc. can perhaps better be considered an overarching aim that gives rise to a multitude of legal mechanisms, including prior assessment of environmental harm, licensing, or authorization that set out the conditions for operation and the consequences for violation of the conditions, as well as the adoption of strategies and policies. Emission limits and other product or process standards, the use of best available techniques, and similar techniques can all be seen as applications of the concept of prevention.
Transboundary Responsibility: Defined in the international law context as an obligation to protect one’s environment. UNEP considers transboundary responsibility at the international level to prevent damage to neighboring environments at the international level as a potential limitation on the rights of the sovereign state. Laws that limit externalities imposed upon human health and the environment may be assessed against this principle.
Precautionary Principle: One of the most commonly encountered and controversial principles of environmental law, the Rio Declaration formulated the precautionary principle as follows, to protect the environment, States shall widely apply the precautionary approach according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation. The principle may play a role in any debate over the need for environmental regulation.