Criminalising Ecocide: a conversation with Jojo Mehta

As the climate crisis escalates, so does the urgent need for legal frameworks that hold decision-makers accountable for environmental destruction.

In this conversation, Jojo Mehta, co-founder and executive director of Stop Ecocide, speaks with Kosha Joubert, CEO of the Pocket Project and co-host of the Climate Consciousness Summit, about the growing movement to criminalise ecocide and its potential to shift global attitudes and corporate behavior. Jojo explores how governments, businesses, and activists are responding, why criminal law is a powerful tool for change, and the pivotal role of frontline nations like Vanuatu, which recently submitted a formal proposal to amend the Rome Statute. As ecocide law gains traction worldwide, she shares why it’s not just about punishment—but about preventing harm, reshaping priorities, and creating a legal foundation for a safer, more sustainable future.

“Criminalising ecocide is a game changer”

Kosha Joubert: Jojo, for those unfamiliar with the movement, could you summarise what it means to criminalise ecocide at the international level?

Jojo Mehta: Absolutely. Ecocide refers to mass damage and destruction of nature, and our work aims to make it an international crime, recognised alongside genocide and war crimes in the International Criminal Court (ICC). This would mean that those in positions of power - CEOs, government officials, and decision-makers - could be held personally accountable if they knowingly cause serious environmental harm.

At its core, this is about deterrence. Right now, most environmental laws focus on regulation and compensation after the fact. But criminal law works differently - it forces decision-makers to pause and ask: Could this action land me in court? That’s a powerful shift, one that could prevent damage before it happens rather than dealing with consequences later.

“Vanuatu is leading the charge”

There’s been a major development this year—Vanuatu, along with Fiji and Samoa, has officially proposed adding ecocide to the ICC’s Rome Statute. How significant is this?

This is huge. The Pacific island nation of Vanuatu has been a leader in climate diplomacy for years, pushing for stronger legal mechanisms to protect vulnerable nations. In September 2023, they, along with Fiji and Samoa, formally proposed an amendment to include ecocide as a crime under the ICC.

This marks the first time a state has officially taken that step, and it means the conversation has moved from advocacy to a real diplomatic process. It’s particularly powerful coming from Vanuatu, which is one of the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world. They are living with the consequences of ecocide every day—rising sea levels, extreme weather, and loss of ecosystems. Their leadership in pushing this forward is incredibly inspiring.

“The European Union is taking steps, too”

You also mentioned progress in the European Union. What’s happening there?

Yes, earlier this year, the EU adopted a revised Environmental Crimes Directive, which includes language referring to “conduct comparable to ecocide.” This is the first time the term ecocide has appeared in EU law.

While the directive doesn’t yet criminalise ecocide in full, it establishes a strong foundation for future legal action. Given that the EU includes some of the world’s largest economies, this has also pushed the conversation forward at the international diplomatic level, creating momentum for the ICC proposal.

“From confrontation to collaboration”

In past years, we’ve discussed how the ecocide movement has evolved—from a confrontational approach to a more collaborative one. Can you talk about that shift?

Yes, in the early days, there was a strong focus on holding individuals accountable—calling out corporate leaders and politicians for their role in environmental destruction. That was important in raising awareness, but as we moved forward, we realised that real legal change requires working with, not against, those in power.

Today, we engage directly with governments, legal experts, businesses, and even financial institutions. We’ve found that many decision-makers—especially in the finance and insurance sectors—actually welcome ecocide law. If criminal accountability is introduced, it gives corporate leaders the ability to push back against harmful business practices. A CEO can say to their board, We can’t do this—it could be criminal. That’s a shift from moral arguments to legal necessity.

“How do we assign responsibility for ecocide?”

When we talk about environmental destruction, responsibility often gets passed around—from corporations to governments to individuals. How does ecocide law determine who is accountable?

That’s a crucial question. The legal definition we work with is very clear: Ecocide is unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there’s a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term harm to the environment.

This focuses on those in superior responsibility—decision-makers at the highest levels of industry and government. We’re talking about CEOs, corporate leaders, and senior government officials who knowingly approve harmful projects. The goal is to prevent people at the top from making decisions that destroy ecosystems while shifting responsibility away from individuals who have little control over systemic issues.

“What comes next?”

This movement has come a long way. What’s the next big step?

The biggest priority now is building political momentum for the ICC amendment process. That means getting more countries to back the proposal and ensuring it becomes a global legal norm.

At the same time, funding remains a challenge. People assume we’re a massive organisation, but we’re actually a small, nimble team. Support from individuals and organisations is critical to keeping this momentum going.

But the most important thing people can do? Talk about ecocide. The more this idea spreads, the harder it becomes to ignore. And that’s how real change happens.

Image by Erik Karitz.