It would radically reframe how we approach environmental
destruction. A law against ecocide stems from a fundamentally
different point of view than current law and regulations. It is a
deontological [meaning: the study of the nature of duty] point of
Now a deontological perspective starts from the premise that we
have a duty of care to the earth. We have an obligation, and from
that idea flows a golden rule, a sacred rule, which is where this
principle of do no harm comes into being. We have a legal duty to
care for the earth. Within existing environmental law, we haven't
established that duty of care. It doesn't exist. This law is
really about shifting our vision and our understanding away from
a very silo, narrow view.
So a deontological perspective comes from a very different place.
It is a fundamental turning around from where we are now and
saying, okay, let's start from a completely different premise
here. It's saying let's start from the first duty that we have,
which is to do no harm. Where does that take us then? If it's
really "do no harm," then we have to start from the premise of
saying we criminalize
mass damage and destruction to the earth. We draw a line in
the sand, and say we're not going to do that anymore.
| Email this Article
| Add to reading list