View previous stories
	Press freedom: the dark cloud gathering over Europe by Thorbjorn Jagland Council of Europe   Today is a day to celebrate free media expression—except for those journalists, even in Europe, denied the capacity to do so.   As we mark this year’s World Press Freedom Day, the memory of the attack at the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris hangs in the air. So, too, do the shootings in Copenhagen, where a cartoonist was again among the targets. So far 2015 has not been much of a friend to freedom of expression. I’m afraid that I do not have good news: across the full length of our continent, media freedom is now under threat.   My annual report shows that the safety of journalists is deteriorating in over a third of European states. Investigative journalists have been killed, imprisoned and harassed. Media outlets have been shut down—including, dramatically, the Crimean Tatar TV station ATR which was forced off air. Cyber-terrorists have attacked national television networks. And all this in just a matter of months.   Most troubling is the prolific nature of our problems. They are not limited to a handful of states.   Journalists have been murdered in Ukraine. Greek reporters have complained of police assault, while their counterparts in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia have received death threats in the form of funeral wreaths delivered to their homes. Turkey has made headlines by banning Twitter. France’s new legislation to block websites ‘inciting terrorism’ has raised concerns. In these, and many other cases, states point to national security, but it is essential that such acts are proportionate, necessary and submitted to appropriate judicial review.   In the majority of European states defamation remains a criminal offence, frequently inhibiting free speech and encouraging self-censorship. Too many public-service broadcasters still suffer from political interference. Even in countries where reporting is considered independent and robust, ownership is overly concentrated and a murky relationship persists between political and media elites.   Investigative journalists have been killed, imprisoned and harassed.   Across the continent, wherever you look, journalists are increasingly struggling to hold power to account. Media freedom, it seems, has become Europe’s longest frontier in the fight for democracy and human rights.   The dangers are clear. Free and forthright journalism is essential to any healthy system of checks and balances. Without it, the abuse and mismanagement of power remains concealed and there can be no competition of ideas. Progress and plurality give way to stagnation and disempowerment. Fewer outcomes could be worse for a continent still gripped by social tension and economic strife.   For the sake of strong and stable democracies, we at the Council of Europe—the continent’s human-rights watchdog—will now redouble our efforts to protect free speech. Advancing media freedom will be given new priority status in our work with our member states, of which there are 47. We will develop a three year, pan-European programme to improve the protection provided to journalists, helping ensure that their safety receives the attention it deserves.   To this end we have established a Platform for the Safety of Journalists, where journalists themselves can sound the alarm. Armed with the standards and laws that bind European nations, the Council of Europe can then address these concerns directly with member states.   As I make this pledge, I call on governments to do the same. Freedom of expression is not limitless. It is wrong to incite violence and hatred and there will be times when state authorities will need to curb liberty temporarily to protect people and save lives. The bar, however, must be set extremely high and we must strive, always, to enable journalists, whistle-blowers and watchdogs to serve their vital democratic function.   Let us resist the slide to censorship, committing instead to scrutiny, opposition and dissent. Freedom of expression is the lifeblood of modern democracy. Right now, it needs our help. Visit the related web page
	What is Ecocide? by Polly Higgins United Kingdom   Ecocide is the extensive damage to, destruction of or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been or will be severely diminished.   In 2010, the proposal to amend the Rome Statute to include an international crime of Ecocide was submitted by Polly Higgins into the International Law Commission (ILC). The ILC is the UN body ‘mandated to promote the progressive development of international law and its codification’. The submission was published as Chapters 5 and 6 in her first book, Eradicating Ecocide.   The purpose for creating the offence of Ecocide as the 5th international Crime Against Peace is to put in place an international law at the very top level. 122 nations (as of 2015) are State Parties to the Rome Statute. International Crime (which is codified in the Rome Statute) applies not only to the signatory States. If and when a person commits a Crime Against Peace, the International Criminal Court has powers to intervene in certain circumstances, even if the person or State involved is a non-signatory.   The Rome Statute is one of the most powerful documents in the world, assigning ‘the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole'' over and above all other laws. Crimes that already exist within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court under Article 5 of the Rome Statute are known collectively as Crime Against Peace.   They are: Article 5(1) The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: 1. The Crime of Genocide; 2. Crimes Against Humanity; 3. War Crimes; 4. The Crime of Aggression   To be added: 5. The Crime of Ecocide.   The inclusion of Ecocide law as international law prohibits mass damage and destruction of the Earth and, as defined above, creates a legal duty of care for all inhabitants that have been or are at risk of being significantly harmed due to Ecocide.   The duty of care applies to prevent, prohibit and pre-empt both human-caused Ecocide and natural catastrophes. Where Ecocide occurs as a crime, remedy can be sought through national courts and the International Criminal Court (ICC) or a similar body.   Currently there is no overriding mandatory duty of care (sometimes called a fiduciary duty) to prohibit, prevent significant hazards or harm, or to pre-empt by assisting to those who are facing Ecocide. Governments, business and finance are not legally bound to be accountable for some of the biggest Ecocides, despite the risk to both humans and nature. By creating a crime of Ecocide, the enforcement of a global primary duty (to stop activities that cause significant harm) ensures that all subsequent decisions are made whereby people and planet are put first. By criminalising Ecocide at an international level, a global duty of care is created.   Ecocide, the extensive destruction of ecosystems, is occurring today. For example:   Large-scale land use that causes the direct destruction of habitats – as is the case with deforestation in most tropical rainforests; Significant pollution – for example, excess greenhouse gases from the industrial activities of the top Carbon Majors; Dangerous industrial activity where entire landscapes are destroyed – such as unconventional oil extraction.   All of the above examples are human caused Ecocides. There are also naturally occurring Ecocides, such as rising sea levels. The legal duty of care that is created here is to give assistance to such territories.   Evidence of the cumulative impact has lead to researchers proposing critical planetary boundaries; transgressing them could be catastrophic: see the Stockholm Resilience Centre: 9 Planetary Boundaries Research.   Look also to evidence from UNEPs Global Environmental Outlook, Healthy People Healthy Planet reports, which examine the severe anthropogenic impacts on the Earth system.   Ecocide Law   Ecocide law has ‘legal teeth.’ Whilst we have many international agreements – voluntary codes of conduct, UN Resolutions, Treaties, Conventions, Protocols etc – the harm escalates. Not one of these international agreements prohibits Ecocide. The power of the Law of Ecocide is that it creates a legal duty of care that holds persons of ‘superior responsibility’ to account in a court of law (both criminal and civil).   * Polly Higgins is an international lawyer, and UK based barrister. She has received a number of awards for her work advocating for a law of Ecocide. She received an Honoris Causa Doctorate from Business School Lausanne 2013, and was Honorary Arne Naess Professor at Oslo University in 2013. Her book, Eradicating Ecocide, won the Peoples Book Prize in 2011 and was updated in 2015. Access the link below for more details. Visit the related web page
	View more stories