Under international humanitarian law, areas can be designated as protected zones. These include demilitarised zones, safety zones, neutralised zones, non-defended localities and hospital zones. The chapter closely assesses the conditions in which these zones could serve to help the plight of animals during war. Although these area-based protections were conceived with anthropocentric interests in mind, they may also provide a measure of protection to animals. However, the requirements imposed by international humanitarian law on the creation of these zones – including the need for consent from the parties to a conflict, and the obligation to refrain from using such zones for any military purposes – are stringent. Moreover, bringing animals into protective areas that may be inhabited by internally displaced persons may incidentally result in detrimental outcomes for animals. In light of these difficulties, the chapter proposes pragmatic solutions to enhance the protection of animals located in these areas. Examples are preparatory measures in peacetime aiming at safeguarding particularly vulnerable animals and the creation of designated eco-centric protected zones.

In Chapter 6, the overall conclusions are discussed in detail, including with respect to the suitability of using the ICC to address environmental harm and the adjudicative coherence thereof. Policy options for the redress of environmental harm under international criminal law are assessed, including using the ICC in its current form; amending the Rome Statute of the ICC; and establishing a new, specifically designed international tribunal (an international court for the environment) to address instances of environmental harm.

In Chapter 2, the analysis focusses on the substantive applicability of the ICC’s framework to environmental harm. It surveys the aims of the Court, as set out in its Preamble; the jurisdictional and admissibility criteria governing the Court’s activities; and the substantive provisions of the Rome Statute of the ICC, namely genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression.

In Chapter 5, three case studies are examined in order to assess the possibility of addressing them through ICC proceedings: first, harm to the environment caused by or during armed conflict, with a particular focus on the environmental destruction in the Middle East wrought by Saddam Hussein’s forces and, later, by ISIS/Da’esh; second, environmental harm caused by the improper transport, storage or disposal of hazardous waste (otherwise known as toxic dumping); and, third, the exploitation of wildlife.

In Chapter 1 the foundations for the subsequent analysis are set out, namely: the definitions of key terms, including the ‘natural environment’, ‘anthropocentricism’, and ‘eco-centricism’; the types of threat that face the environment; the expressive and enforcement functions of international criminal law; the background to international environmental law and international criminal law; the origins of the concept of ecocide; the key features of the ICC; and the notion of adjudicative coherence, which is a novel test used in analysis to test the ICC’s ability to address environmental harm.

In Chapter 4, the focus turns to victims. The assessment looks to the ICC regime governing victims’ participation and reparations against the backdrop of environmental harm.

In Chapter 3, the analysis addresses the procedural framework of the ICC, first looking to the rules and principles governing the major stages of proceedings from investigation to pre-trial to trial and appeal; and then looking at the specific rules governing evidence, including expert evidence, most relevant to cases of environmental harm.