ECOCIDE: MEDICAL, ECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS

Ecocide is a particularly grave crime against the peace and security of mankind, expressed in the use of military or other hostile means of influence on outer space, lithosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere and biosphere. Currently, due to the peculiarities identified during a special military operation, the capabilities of unmanned aircraft, as well as the use of satellites for military purposes, the topic of ecocide has moved from the civilian to the military sphere, undoubtedly expanding significantly.
Materials and methods: individual problems were studied (it is not possible to investigate the problems within the framework of one article) that affect ecocide, as well as ways to increase the effectiveness of ecocide control, an analysis of data from patients in the intensive care unit of the Military Medical Academy of St. Petersburg, an analysis of the causes of death of participants in the Special Military Operation (hereinafter – SVO) from open data and the media.
The methodological basis of the study is the general scientific method, the method of formal logic and system analysis, synthesis, induction, the method of description and comparison.
Results and discussion. The most difficult, but necessary, object of study is human health. When studying cases of signs of poisoning among participants in the special military operation (April 2025), we encountered problems that require not only discussion, but also a range of measures that will allow us to talk about ecocide. An analysis of legislation and judicial practice shows that criminal liability can be imposed not only for an act that has caused socially dangerous consequences, but also for creating conditions that make it possible for such consequences to occur. There is no doubt that ecocide should be considered a crime against the peace and security of humanity. This view is supported by the majority of scholars. It is believed that the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) has established a strong global norm regarding biological weapons. However, the effectiveness of the convention has been limited due to insufficient institutional support and the absence of an official verification regime. Currently, the proof of a violation of the CBA requires significant material components. In order to prove the use of biological weapons in a combat zone, it is necessary to create a proof base, which requires significant material investments to establish laboratories that serve military hospitals. In cases of suspected use of chemical weapons, the focus should be on identifying chemical agents in the human body. The task is further complicated by the combined effects of chemical trauma and blast (mine-blast) injuries. The severity of the condition in these cases will be determined by the multifactorial nature of the injuries. The implementation of detoxification should be justified and supported by sufficient research. It is well known that the crime of Ecocide is classified as follows: chemical trauma + explosive (mine-explosive), at a minimum. The severity of the condition in these cases will be determined by multifactoriality. The implementation of detoxification should be justified and confirmed by sufficient research. It is well known that the crime of “Ecocide” is among the illegal acts with a material and formal composition. The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), or the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), is a treaty that prohibits the use of biological and toxic weapons and restricts their development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling, and use. The unique feature of criminal cases in this category is that harmful consequences can occur outside the place where the criminal act was committed. Currently, there are a sufficient number of articles in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus that are not actually applied in practice, or are applied only rarely, as they do not contain a clear formulation of the objective side of the relevant crimes, which leads to difficulties in qualifying the crime. The formulation of the crime of ecocide, unlike the formulations found in international law, is broader and less specific. However, the article does not specify the specific actions, methods, and means that can cause damage to the environment. Sometimes researchers incorrectly identify two concepts that are not equivalent: ecocide and biocide.
Conclusions. Based on the above, taking into account today’s realities, and given that the immediate object of the crime in question is the security of humanity, and the additional object is human life and health, it is proposed that in the future, when qualifying, the elements of the crime in question should be examined in detail in law enforcement practice.
The medical component of ecocide is one of the most important, as it includes not only the direct rescue of the victims’ lives, but also a very complex system of proving the fact of harm to human health, which is related to the violation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction. This is not only a significant financial investment for conducting complex diagnostics, but also an equally costly expense for treatment (detoxification). Neither the legislation nor the judicial practice contains a definition of “environmental disaster”. We consider it necessary to develop this definition through a systematic analysis of the norms of environmental legislation.
There are also many questions regarding the evaluative category of the term “massive destruction”. The wording of the article does not make it clear how much of the plant or animal life must be destroyed for the actions of individuals to be considered mass-scale.
In order to clearly and consistently define the subject area through legal analysis of the composition of Ecocide in the Republic of Belarus, we consider it appropriate to detail the practice of qualifying the crime under investigation, as well as to develop a definition of the crime of “biocide”.
The evidence base requires serious improvement during the investigation of Ecocide. The issue of establishing laboratories to determine the presence of toxic substances in the human body is particularly urgent, not only because with the process of proving, but also in connection with the need to provide first medical aid to individuals with combined injuries.

1. Ugolovnyy kodeks Respubliki Belarus’ [Elektronnyy resurs]: 9 iyulya 1999 g., № 275-Z: prinyat Palatoy predstaviteley 2 iyunya 1999 g.: odobr. Sovetom Resp. 24 iyunya 1999 g.: v red. Zakona Resp. Belarus’ ot 09.03.2023 g. // ETALON. Zakonodatel’stvo Respubliki Belarus’ / Nats. tsentr pravovoy informatsii Resp. Belarus’. – Minsk, 2024 (In Russ).

2. Ugolovnyy kodeks RF [Elektronnyy resurs]: 13 iyunya 1996 g., № 63-ФЗ, 31.07.2025 (In Russ).

3. Rimskii statut Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda [The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court]. Avai- lable 4. Ekotsid mozhet stat’ pyatym mezhdunarodnym prestupleniem [Ecocide may become the fifth international crime]. – Available at: https://zttim.ru/news/ekoczid-mozhet-stat-pyatymmezhdunarodnym-prestupleniem/ [Accessed 09/12/24].

4. Hardell, L., Carlberg M. Lost opportunities for cancer prevention: historical evidence on early warnings with emphasis on radiofrequency radiation. Reviews on environmental health. – 2021. – Vol. 36, № 4. – P. 585–597.

5. Hellman, J. The fifth crime under international criminal law: ecocide? In: Regulating corporate criminal liability. – Springer, 2014. – P. 273–280.

6. Higgins, P. Eradicating ecocide: laws and governance to stop the destruction of the planet. – Shepheard-Walwyn, 2015. – 224 p.

7. Legge, D., Brooman S. Reflecting on 25 years of teaching animal law: is it time for an international crime of animal ecocide? Liverpool law review. – 2020. – Vol. 41, № 2. – P. 201–218.

8. Okpabi and others (appellants) v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and another (respondents). Available at: https://www.supremecourt.uk/press-summary/uksc-2018-0068.html [Accessed 09/12/24].