•  
  •  
 

UC Law Environmental Journal

Abstract

Gaza has frequently been the target of environmental damage from Israel. Dating back to its immigration to Palestine, Israel has impacted Palestine’s water systems, destroyed its natural landscape, and forcibly changed much of the landscape through invasive species. This environmental harm is only worsened by the repeated conflict in the region, which has damaged infrastructure and water systems and caused contamination of air, water, and soil. Gaza was already struggling with these environmental concerns, coupled with its susceptibility to climate change, when the conflict with Israel intensified in October 2023. All progress that was being made to strengthen Gaza’s infrastructure and rebuild its environment has since been destroyed, and its landscape has only gotten worse in recent months. Land has been destroyed, water is not safe to drink, tons of debris litter the streets, and contamination will sit in the environment for decades, leading to health issues for those who may return there.

“Ecocide” is a term used to reference the intentional, widespread destruction of the environment. Some propose to include it as an international crime under the Rome Statute so that people in power that intentionally cause great harm to another’s natural environment can be charged under international law. Although ecocide is not explicitly an international crime at this time, there is support in international law, as well as in some nations’ national laws, that provide a way for claims of environmental destruction to be brought against Israel’s leaders, including Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant. This support primarily comes from the Rome Statute’s Article 8(2)(b)(iv) and Article 7(1)(k), for war crimes and crimes against humanity, respectively.

The UN and individual nations have signaled support for amending the Rome Statute to include ecocide as a crime. This Article argues that ecocide should be codified as a crime under the Rome Statute, either as an amendment to Article 8 and/or 7, or as a fifth international crime. In the alternative, I suggest that evidence is sufficient to bring charges against Israel’s leaders under existing frameworks for environmental destruction, even if such charges don’t rise to the level of ecocide. The devastating, unprecedented level of damage in Gaza calls for such a charge.

Download

Share

COinS