COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on stepping up the fight against environmental crime
Date: 2021-12-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, biodiversity, criminal law, environmental cooperation, environmental liability, environmental offence, environmental protection, fight against crime, pollution control measures, waste management

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 15.12.2021  COM(2021) 814 final  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on stepping up the fight against environmental crime  
 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION 

The success of the European Green Deal hinges to a large extent on rules aimed at curbing pollution, 
managing waste and safeguarding biodiversity. Environmental crime seriously undermines these aims 
and efforts must be stepped up to combat it.  

Environmental  crime  is  a  growing  concern  causing  significant  damage  to  the  environment  and  to 
human health within and beyond the EU and to the economy. According to Interpol and the United 
Nations  Environment  Programme,  environmental  crime  is  the  fourth  largest  criminal  activity  in  the 
world after drugs trafficking, human trafficking, and counterfeiting, growing at a rate between 5%-7% 
per year1. According to Eurojust, illegal trafficking in waste and in wildlife species, pollution crimes, 
and illegal trading in hazardous substances belong to the most serious environmental crimes2. Recent 
studies3 estimate that the annual revenues derived only from the illicit waste market in the EU range 
between EUR 4 billion and EUR 15 billion.  

Transgressions to be addressed by criminal law include: serious illegal pollution of air, water and soil; 
mismanagement of waste; illegal trade in wildlife; illegal extraction of minerals; illegal persecution of 
wild  animals  and  birds;  and  land-clearance  in  wildlife  sites.  All  these  reduce  the  quality  of  air  and 
water,  contaminate  land,  harm  wild  species  and  damage  or  destroy  precious  natural  habitats. 
Individuals and society as a whole suffer the effects of environmental degradation, including damage 
to health. The circular economy is adversely affected, fair competition is undermined and government 
revenues are reduced. The victims are future generations as well as current ones. 

Despite the harm transgressors cause, their risk of detection is often low and the risks of prosecution 
and  sanctioning  are  even  lower,  while  they  gain  financially  from  the  avoidance  of  environmental 
safeguards. This situation helps explain the involvement of organised crime. In May 2017, as part of 
the  rolling  EU  policy  cycle  to  tackle  serious  and  organised  crime,  the  Council  included  fighting 
environmental  crime  as  one  of  the  crime-combating  priorities  for  2018-2021.  In  2021,  this  priority 
was renewed for 2022-20254. 

Combating  environmental  crime  is  an  aspect  of  what  the  United  Nations  terms  the  ‘environmental 
rule of law’5. This describes a situation in which laws are widely understood, respected and enforced 
and the benefits of environmental protection are enjoyed by people and the planet. Since the adoption 
in 2008 of the Environmental Crime Directive6, a deeper understanding has emerged of the challenges 
and best means of combating environmental crime. In 2019, following a round of mutual evaluations 

1  UNEP-INTERPOL  Rapid  Response  Assessment:  The  Rise  of  Environmental  Crime  –  A  Growing  Threat  To  Natural 
Resources Peace, Development And Security, June 2016.  
2  European  Union  Agency  for  Criminal  Justice  Cooperation.  (2021).  Report  on  Eurojust’s  Casework  on  Environmental 
Crime. Criminal justice across borders. 
3  Mapping  the  risk  of  serious  and  organised  crime  infiltrating  legitimate  businesses,  final  report  prepared  for  Directorate-
General for Migration and Home Affairs of the European Commission (2021), edited by Shann Hulme, Emma Disley and 
Emma Louise Blondes, p. 40. The study identifies a growth in the revenue estimates of the EU illicit waste market for both 
hazardous and non-hazardous waste and indicates that, without more effective measures put in place, the illegal shipment of 
plastic waste, end-of-life vehicles and e-waste are expected to further increase. 
4 Council conclusions setting the EU's priorities for the fight against serious and organised crime for EMPACT 2022 – 2025, 
8665/21, 12 May 2021. The aim of the environmental crime priority is ‘to disrupt criminal networks involved in all forms of 
environmental crime, with a specific focus on waste and wildlife trafficking, as well as on criminal networks and individual 
criminal  entrepreneurs  with  a  capability  to  infiltrate  legal  business  structures  at  high  level  or  to  set  up  own  companies  in 
order to facilitate their crimes’. 
In  its  2021  Communication  on  the  EU  strategy  to  tackle  organised  crime,  COM  (2021)  170  final,  the  Commission  also 
stressed the need to improve the legislative framework, strengthen enforcement capacity at national and EU level to tackle 
environmental  crime  more  effectively,  and  further  enhance  cooperation  through  the  European  environmental  enforcement 
networks.  
5 Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report | UNEP - UN Environment Programme. 
6 Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law, OJL 328, 6.12.2008, p. 28-37. 

1 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
of  the  practical  implementation  and  operation  of  European  policies  on  preventing  and  combating 
environmental  crime,  the  Council  produced  a  report  with  a  series  of  recommendations,  covering 
(among other matters) the adoption of national strategies, inter-agency cooperation and coordination, 
training and statistics7.  

To  tackle  environmental  crime  effectively,  the  legal  framework  needs  to  respond  to  the  current 
challenges and provide a solid legal basis for addressing them. There will be no lasting improvement 
in tackling transgressions if the state does not put the fight against environmental crime high on the 
enforcement agenda, both nationally and cross-border across the EU. Where there is a low likelihood 
of facing criminal sanctions, transgressors will not be deterred from environmental crime, even if the 
legislative framework is improved.  

It is against this background that the Commission is inviting both the EU co-legislators and Member 
States to give priority to measures aimed at reinforcing the fight against environmental crime. 

2.   STRENGTHENING THE EU LEGAL FRAMEWORK  

The adoption of the Environmental Crime Directive in 2008 was an important step in recognising the 
role of criminal law in protecting the environment effectively. That Directive has ensured that a set of 
commonly agreed serious environmental offences are considered as crimes in all EU Member States.  

However,  the  2020  Commission  evaluation8  shows  that  the  current  Environmental  Crime  Directive 
has  significant  limitations  and  shortcomings.  The  Directive  has  not  been  updated  in  line  with  the 
development  of  EU  environmental  law  and  does  not respond  to  current  challenges.  For  example,  it 
does not cover categories of offences such as illegal timber trade or illegal ship recycling. In terms of 
its practical effects, the Directive requires, in a rather general manner, national legislation to include 
provisions on criminal sanctions; it does not cover the levels and types of sanctions, nor issues related 
to the detection or prosecution of environmental crime.  Moreover, there is a need to improve clarity 
concerning  definitions  of  environmental  offences  and  key  concepts  used  in  the  Directive,  such  as 
‘substantial damage’.  

The evaluation also demonstrates that sanction levels differ  greatly  among Member States and their 
application in practice appears not to be dissuasive.  There has been no  clear  improvement of cross-
border cooperation since the Directive came into force.  

Advice  from  practitioners  working  on  the  ground  suggests  that,  for  the  fight  against  environmental 
crime to be effective, it is necessary to:  

 

 

 
 
 
 

treat environmental offences as part of a wider phenomenon of environmental infringements 
and use both administrative and criminal law;  
ensure  prevention  and  detection  of  environmental  crimes  as  well  as  punishment  and 
remediation of damage;  
engage multiple skill sets, disciplines and specialisations;  
ensure a high level of coordination and cooperation between practitioners;  
ensure collection and effective use of data; and 
allocate sufficient human and financial resources.  

report  of 

7  Final 
https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14065-2019-INIT/en/pdf. 
8 SWD(2020) 259 final. 

the  Eighth 

round  of  mutual  evaluations  on  environmental  crime,  document  14065/19, 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
To address the current shortcomings of the Directive, take account of new developments and trends in 
environmental crime, and support key demands from practitioners, the Commission proposes that the 
new Environmental Crime Directive:  

  Update and refine the list of criminal offences. The list of criminal offences covered by the 
current Directive will be updated and new offences will be added to reflect the current state of 
EU environmental law and better address the most harmful unlawful activities. The revision 
will increase legal certainty by providing specific and clear descriptions of criminal offences. 
The  criminal  offences  covered  by  the  proposal  represent  serious  breaches  of  obligations  in 
sectorial legislation as it stands on the date of this proposal9. The Commission continues to 
deliver legislative proposals under the European Green Deal. Examples include proposals on 
minimising the risk of deforestation and forest degradation associated with products placed on 
the  EU  market10,  and  an  upcoming  proposal  on  nature  restoration  law. The  Commission 
invites the co-legislators to consider further extending the scope of the Environmental Crime 
Directive  in  line  with  such  impending  new  legislation.  This  should  ensure  that  the  most 
serious  offences  covered  by  the  new  legislation  are  also  reflected  in  an  evolving 
Environmental Crime Directive. 

New categories of offences proposed in the new Environmental Crime Directive include: 

 
 
 
 

illegal timber trade; 
illegal ship recycling; 
illegal water abstraction causing substantial damage to water resources;  
serious  breaches  of  EU  chemicals  legislation  causing  substantial  damage  to  the 
environment or human health; 

  placement  on  the  market  of  products  which,  in  breach  of  mandatory  requirements, 
cause  substantial  damage  to  the  environment  or  people’s  health  because  of  the 
product’s use on a larger scale; 
source discharge of polluting substances from ships; 
serious breaches of legislation on invasive alien species with Union concern; 
serious  circumvention  of  requirements  to  get  a  development  consent  and  to  do 
environmental impact assessment causing substantial damage; 
serious breaches related to dealing with fluorinated greenhouse gases. 

 
 
 

 

  Strengthen  the  provisions  on  criminal  sanctions.  The  proposed  provisions  on  the 
approximation  of  types  and  levels  of  sanctions  will  enhance  their  deterrent  effect  and  help 
ensure  more  consistent  application  across  the  EU,  providing  a  level  playing  field  for 
businesses. Ancillary sanctions and measures are proposed to ensure that national judges and 
prosecutors have a toolbox allowing sanctions to be imposed in a tailored manner. Provisions 
on  aggravating  circumstances  will  ensure  more  effective  sanctioning,  including  by  taking 
account of links with organised crime, the compliance history of perpetrators, and obstruction 
of inspection and enforcement activities.  

  Recognise  and  strengthen  the  enforcement  chain.  Effective  criminal-law  enforcement 
depends  on  the  capacities,  skills  and  performance  of  each  link  in  a  chain  that  connects  the 
roles of environmental inspectorates, police and other law enforcement agencies, prosecution 
services and the judiciary. The proposal envisages the adoption of national strategies with the 

9 For instance, offences related to waste  mismanagement are based on provisions in relevant EU legislation governing the 
handling of waste.  
10  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  on  the  making  available  on  the  Union  market  as  well  as  export  from  the  Union  of  certain 
commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest degradation, COM(2021) 706 final. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
shared priority of mobilising efforts to combat environmental crime in the most effective way. 
To  strengthen  the  enforcement  chain,  the  proposal  aims  at  ensuring  the  availability  of 
appropriate specialist training, effective investigation tools, and mechanisms for cooperation 
among  enforcers  in  a  Member  State.  These  measures  would  allow  more  effective  and 
comparable efforts to tackle environmental crime across the EU. The proposal also recognises 
the role of European networks of enforcers. 

  Recognise  and  strengthen  the  role  of  citizens  and  civil  society.  Effectively  combating 
environmental  crime  also  requires  the  mobilisation  of  citizens  and  civil  society  as  well  as 
ensuring public confidence in the national enforcement systems. Those who blow the whistle 
and  report  environmental  criminal  offences11  as  well  as  those  who  cooperate  in  criminal 
proceedings should be protected and supported. The public concerned should be able to take 
part in criminal proceedings, on the basis of national procedural rules, for example as a civil 
party.  

Environmental  crime  is  a  complex  phenomenon  and  effectively  addressing  it  requires  a  holistic 
strategic  approach  at  different  levels.  It  is  therefore  particularly  important  to  ensure  the  effective 
implementation of environmental criminal law in Member States.  

3.  ENSURING THE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

CRIMINAL LAW IN THE MEMBER STATES 

Having  a  strong  and  clear  criminal-law  legislative  framework  is  necessary  but  not  sufficient  for 
success.  Effective  systems  of  law  enforcement  are  also  needed.  The  proposal  sets  out  minimum 
standards  for  criminal  enforcement  concerning  environmental  offences,  such  as  investigation  tools, 
resources and cooperation. The Commission can also contribute to this goal in several other ways.  

Coherence  with  wider  environmental  compliance  assurance  programmes  and  provisions  on 
sanctions in EU environmental legislation 

The use of criminal law relates  ultimately  to a broader objective: ensuring general compliance with 
EU environmental laws. In 2018, the Commission presented this objective in terms of ‘environmental 
compliance assurance’12. This means the combination of  measures that competent authorities use to 
secure compliance. It includes promotion of compliance, prevention of infringements, verification of 
compliance,  discovery  of  infringements  and  the  use  of  administrative  as  well  as  criminal-law 
enforcement measures.  

As  noted,  practitioners  stress  the  importance  of  the  use  of  criminal-law  measures  that  are  coherent 
with  wider  compliance assurance  and links  to  administrative  enforcement.  All  infringements  of  EU 
law  require  sanctions13,  not  just  infringements  justifying  criminal-law  sanctions  –  which  is  why 
Commission  legislative  proposals  include  provisions  on  sanctions14.  Determining  what  kind  of 
sanctions  are  appropriate  in  specific  circumstances  requires  the  capacity  to  make  case-by-case 
choices. Sometimes the decision will be to prosecute an environmental crime; sometimes it will be to 
use administrative sanctions. It may be necessary to apply both administrative-law and criminal-law 
measures  –  as  in  situations  where  an  activity  constituting  criminal  misconduct  also  gives  rise  to  a 

11 See also Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of 
persons who report breaches of Union law. 
12 Commission communication on EU actions to improve environmental compliance and governance, COM(2018) 10 final.  
13 Case 68/88 Commission v Greece (Greek Maize) [1989] ECR 2965, paragraphs 23 and 24. 
14 An example of such a provision on sanctions is Article 16 of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on 
the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (CITES Regulation). The Commission proposal 
for a new Waste Shipment Regulation also includes a detailed provision on sanctions.  

4 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
liability  to  remedy  environmental  damage,  as  long  as  these  measures  do  not  amount  to  a  double 
penalty.  

The Commission will contribute to ensuring coherence through: 

 

 

a more detailed focus on provisions on sanctions in sectorial EU legislation, both at the time 
they  are  formulated  and  in  their  transposition  into  national  law.  Among  other  things,  the 
Commission will assess whether, in addition to such provisions on sanctions, amendments to 
existing and future new environmental law provisions need to be accompanied by adjustments 
to  the  offences  set  out  in  the  Environmental  Crime  Directive  to  ensure  effective 
implementation and enforcement;  

an increased level of cooperation with Member States and law enforcement professionals in 
the  area  of  environmental  compliance  and  governance,  notably  through  the  Environmental 
Compliance and Governance Forum15. This cooperation framework will  enable it to address 
cross-cutting issues in the use of criminal law and administrative law in enforcement16. 

Supporting the enforcement chain 

Weak links in the enforcement chain render entire systems ineffective. Poor detection means crimes 
going undiscovered; over-stretched or ill-trained prosecution services mean detected crimes not being 
prosecuted  at  all  or  being  poorly  addressed  at  trial;  and  court  systems  lacking  capacity  or 
understanding of the dynamics of environmental crime mean trial delays and unsatisfactory outcomes. 

At EU level, European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) (concerning administrative enforcement), Europol 
and  Eurojust  represent  forms  of  coordination  and  support  for  the  enforcement  chain.  Voluntary 
European networks of environment agencies, inspectors, police, prosecutors and judges also support 
the  chain  by  facilitating  the  sharing  of  knowledge  and  experience  among  enforcement  and  justice 
professionals.  Apart  from  the  proposed  new  provisions,  the  Commission  will  seek  to  support  the 
enforcement chain by: 

 

encouraging  voluntary  professional  networks  to  use  the  Environmental  Compliance  and 
Governance  Forum  to  share  insights  on  the  operation  of  the  chain  as  criminal-law 
enforcement  evolves  and,  where  appropriate,  seek  closer  ties  with  EU  agencies  such  as 
Eurojust; 

  helping  to  develop  tools  and  approaches  that  make  the  fight  against  environmental  crime 
effective,  for  example  supporting  the  use  of  geo-spatial  and  artificial  intelligence  to  collect 
and  collate  evidence  of  crimes  such  as  illegal  waste  disposal  and  destruction  of  protected 
habitats17;  

 

encouraging  use  of  the  LIFE  Regulation  to  develop  more  effective  ways  of  combating 
environmental crime18 and to support the operation of several key networks19; 

15  Commission  Decision  of  18  January  2018  setting  up  a  group  of  experts  on  environmental  compliance  and  governance, 
C(2018) 10 final. 
16  A  sub-group  on  sanctioning  of  environmental  offences  has  been  established  under  the  Environmental  Compliance  and 
Governance  Forum  to  work,  inter  alia,  on  ensuring  consistency  between  different  pieces  of  relevant  legislation  and 
identification of good enforcement and sanctioning practices. 
17 See Regulation (EU) 2021/696 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing the Union 
Space Programme and the European Union Agency for the Space Programme and repealing Regulations (EU) No 912/2010, 
(EU) No 1285/2013 and (EU) No 377/2014 and Decision No 541/2014/EU, which recognises the role of space technologies 
and geo-spatial intelligence for environmental compliance assurance which is included now in the scope of the Copernicus 
Programme (Recitals 77, 78, Articles 49 (4) (b) and 51 (1) (a)).  
18 See Regulation (EU) 2021/783 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing a Programme 
for  the  Environment  and  Climate  Action  (LIFE),  and  repealing  Regulation  (EU)  No  1293/2013.  Useful  examples  of 
successful  relevant  LIFE-funded  projects  from  the  past  are  the  LIFE  SMART  Waste  project  (LSW),  which  ran  as  an 

5 

 
 
 
                                                           
 

 

considering  whether  future  legislative  proposals  should  include  provisions  on  compliance 
verification and detection of infringements to reinforce provisions on sanctions and strengthen 
overall compliance assurance;  

improving the coverage of environmental criminal law in the rolling training programme for 
cooperation with national judges and prosecutors, within the EU and beyond20;  

  promoting  and  contributing  to  the  European  Multidisciplinary  Platform  Against  Criminal 
Threats (EMPACT) as a security initiative driven by Member States to identify, prioritise and 
address threats posed by organised and serious international crime, including environmental 
crime as a key priority for 2022-2025 and concrete operational actions.  

Also, the Commission will consider the possible extension of OLAF’s mandate in sectorial legislation 
to conduct administrative investigations of environmental offences.  

It is vital that Member States also contribute to supporting the enforcement chain at EU level, notably 
by enabling and encouraging participation of their professionals in the European voluntary networks. 
Without  this,  it  will  be  more  difficult  to  ensure  a  cohesive  and  even  approach  to  fighting 
environmental crime across the EU. 

Capitalising on the knowledge of enforcement professionals 

Combating  environmental  crime  is  complex  in  terms  of  the  required  knowledge  of  law,  procedures 
and human interactions with the environment. Relevant knowledge is held by individual practitioners 
as well as by law enforcement and justice agencies and institutions. The European Judicial Training 
Network  (EJTN)  delivers  high-quality  training  and  distributes  essential  knowledge  to  judicial 
practitioners in this area. 

The Council’s completion of the eight rounds of mutual evaluations is an example of capitalising on 
such  knowledge.  So  is  the  approval  by  the  Environmental  Compliance  and  Governance  Forum  in 
2021 of guidance on combating environmental crimes and related infringements21. The latter was the 
result of extensive collaboration between the Commission, Member States and professional networks. 
Other  examples  include  work  done  by  professional  networks  on  subjects  such  as  risk-based 
inspections  as  well  as  good  practices  and  gravity  factors  in  prosecutions  and  sentencing22.  The 
evolution  of  criminal-law  provisions  and  practices  will  create  opportunities  to  further  capitalise  on 
such professional knowledge.  

The Commission will seek to play its part by: 

 

 

actively disseminating and promoting work already done in collaboration with practitioners, 
including via the EJTN; 

encouraging practitioners’ networks to identify areas of concern and practical advice on how 
to address these. 

innovative partnership between key European bodies from 2014 to 2020 demonstrating innovative ways of understanding, 
tackling and reducing waste-related crime, and the IMPEL LIFE SWEAP project running from 2018 to 2023 and focusing 
on waste shipments, enforcement actions and mapping trends in illegal waste shipment.  
19  The  LIFE  Regulation  recognizes  the  role  of  networks,  such  as  IMPEL,  ENPE  and  EUFJE  (Recital  33,  Article  13  and 
Annex 1).  
20 Training materials already developed in the framework of this program are available online.  
21 The guidance on combating environmental crime and related infringements is published online.  
22 For example,  IMPEL has developed guidance documents on the environmental inspection cycle,  on landfill inspections 
presenting  best  practices  from  different  legal  systems  and  pointing  at  the  importance  of  proper  inspection  planning.  The 
European  Network  of  Prosecutors  for  the  Environment  (ENPE)  produced  the  report  Sanctioning  Environmental  Crime  – 
Prosecution and Judicial Practices.  

6 

 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
Supporting environmental defenders, whistleblowers and victims 

The  burden  of  combating  environmental  crime  falls  to  public  authorities,  but  the  role  of 
environmental  defenders  and  whistleblowers  also  deserves  recognition,  as  does  the  position  of 
victims.  

The fight against wildlife crime benefits considerably from the work of specialist non-governmental 
organisations (NGOs), who uncover criminality, gather evidence of it and highlight its effects. More 
generally,  civil  society,  including  a  range  of  NGOs,  plays  a  vital  role  in  alerting  authorities  to 
problems such as illegal waste disposal. Whistleblowers can play a key role in uncovering corporate 
criminal  conduct.  The  first-ever  EU  strategy  on  victims'  rights  (2020-2025)23  covers  environmental 
crime  victims  among  other  things,  noting  that  victims  of  environmental  crime  may  be  particularly 
susceptible to secondary victimisation, intimidation and retaliation, notably if environmental crime is 
a form of organised crime.  

The  Commission  will  further  seek  to  support  environmental  defenders,  whistleblowers  and  victims 
through: 

 

 

 

encouraging  use  of  the  LIFE  Regulation  for  projects  involving  the  participation  of 
environmental defenders in the combating of environmental crime; 

encouraging  Member  States  to  have  effective  complaint-handling  systems  that  enable  civil 
society to safely inform the competent authorities about environmental crimes24; 

as  announced in  the  Commission  Work  Programme  2021,  a  proposal for legislation  against 
abusive  litigation  targeting  journalists  and  rights  defenders  will  be  adopted,  including 
environmental defenders. 

Enhancing corporate responsibility 

Addressing environmental offences and damage done by them raises a wide set of issues, including 
liability  for  environmental  damage  and  corporate  responsibility  in  a  context  where  markets  involve 
supply chains that are vulnerable to criminal and other misconduct25. 

The Commission acknowledges that the fight against environmental crime will be more effective if it 
is  part  of  a  wider  effort  to  enhance  corporate  responsibility  and  ensure  adherence  to  the  “polluter 
pays” principle. 

In parallel to work on environmental crime, the Commission will: 

 

carry out the second evaluation of the Environmental Liability Directive  2004/35/EC which 
will examine how to improve the application of the polluter pays principle to environmental 
damage.  While  both  directives  (the  Environmental  Crime  Directive  and  the  Environmental 
Liability  Directive),  aim  at  strengthening 
the 
Environmental  Crime  Directive  concerns  addressing  individual  breaches  of  environmental 
law  and  the  Environmental  Liability  Directive  concerns  remedial  measures  to  be  taken  in 
order to restore environmental damage; 

the  protection  of 

the  environment, 

engagement. 

23 COM(2020) 258 final. 
24  In  2019,  the  Environmental  Compliance  and  Governance  Forum  approved  a  vade  mecum  on  complaint-handling  and 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1fc175c2-8051-11ea-b94a-
citizen 
guide: 
Commission 
01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/system/files/2020-09/Environmental%20complaints%20-%20summary%20guide.pdf.  
25  European  Parliament  resolution  of  20  May  2021  on  the  liability  of  companies  for  environmental  damage 
(2020/2027(INI)).  

produced 

summary 

also 

The 

See 

has 

a 

7 

 
 
 
                                                           
 

as  announced  in  the  Commission  Work  Programme  2021,  put  forward  a  proposal  for 
legislation  on  sustainable  corporate  governance  to  foster  long-term  sustainable  and 
responsible corporate behaviour.  

4.  LOOKING OUTWARD: INTERNATIONAL DIMENSION 

The fight against environmental crime has  also an international dimension. Wildlife trafficking may 
originate in countries outside the EU, and both waste and wildlife trafficking generate serious adverse 
effects, including outside of the EU’s borders. The global nature of supply chains means that the EU 
may find itself importing goods and services which involve serious environmental abuses. The global 
character of the climate and biodiversity crises means that the EU itself will be adversely affected by 
environmental crime taking place elsewhere on the planet, especially where it is vast in scale and puts 
the global commons in danger.  

Internationally, growing attention is being given to addressing the problems of environmental crime 
and  there  is  an  increasing  understanding  that  lasting  change  can  be  achieved  by  acting  together. 
Hence,  it  is  important  to  continue  fostering  international  cooperation  in  this  area.  There  is  also 
growing attention to abuses that occur on a large scale and with severe or long-term damage to the 
environment  (also  called  ‘ecocide’)26  and  the  new  Environmental  Crime  Directive  contributes  to 
addressing  that  by  strengthening  the  fight  against  environmental  crimes.  Environmental  crime  may 
contribute  to  fuelling  conflict  and  instability,  as  it  is  often  associated  with  the  funding  of  armed 
groups and civil conflicts as well as environmental degradation. Indeed, the value of environmental 
crime makes it the fourth largest form of crime in the world, as explained in the introduction. Wildlife 
trafficking, illegal logging and related illegal trade in timber, as well as illegal waste trafficking have 
become  a  serious  threat  to  the  security,  political  stability,  economy,  natural  resources  and  cultural 
heritage  of  many  countries  and  regions.  In  addition  to  the  environmental  impacts,  there  is  growing 
evidence  that  the  corruption  that  derives  from  it  and  enables  it  to  flourish  feeds  a  spiral  that 
undermines the rule of law, fosters other criminal activities and fuels insecurity. At the same time, the 
destruction and degradation of the environment, either by being used as weapon of war or damaged 
from  attacks  and  conflict-sustaining  activities,  ultimately  hinders  the  recovery  of  conflict-affected 
populations who depend on natural resources for their livelihoods and well-being.  It is important to 
advocate  globally  for  the  protection  of  the  natural  environment  in  armed  conflict  in  line  with 
international humanitarian law. 

To  help  tackle  environmental  crime  at  global  level,  the  EU  has  been  a  major  supporter  of  the 
International  Consortium  on  Combating  Wildlife  Crime  (ICCWC),  a  partnership  involving  the 
Convention  on  International  Trade  in  Endangered  Species of  Wild  Fauna  and  Flora  secretariat,  the 
International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), UN Office on Drugs and Crime, the World 
Bank  and the World  Customs  Organization. The  Consortium  works  to  bring  coordinated support  to 
national  wildlife  law  enforcement  agencies  and  related  sub-regional  and  regional  networks.  The 
Union should also increase its support to training law enforcement staff and members of the judiciary 
in  the  countries  involved  in  environmental  crime  at  global  level.  Common  Security  and  Defence 
Policy activities can also contribute to these efforts. 

It  is  equally  important  for  the  EU  to  address  issues  linked  to  environmental  crime  in  its  bilateral 
relations with partner countries. Stepping up the fight against environmental crime  is and should be 

26 See for example European Parliament resolution of 20 May 2021 on the liability of companies for environmental damage 
which  states  in  point  12  that  [the  European  Parliament]  “Takes  note  of  the  Member  States’  increasing  commitment  to 
working towards the recognition of ecocide at national and international level; asks the Commission to study the relevance 
of ecocide to EU law and EU diplomacy”. 

8 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
increasingly  part  of  the  EU’s    political  and  policy  dialogues  and  an  area  of  bilateral  and  regional 
cooperation. 

Tackling  environmental crimes  in  the  EU has  broad global relevance,  being  necessary  among  other 
things  for  the  delivery  of  the  Sustainable  Development  Goals.  Strengthening  it  within  the  EU  will 
help the EU lead by example and be an effective global partner. 

The Commission and the High Representative will: 

  promote  the  fight  against  environmental  crime  at  international  level,  including  by  working 

with UNEP and in the context of multilateral environmental agreements;  

 

 

 

 

 

 

revise  the  EU  action  plan  against  wildlife  trafficking  in  the  light  of  experience  with  its 
implementation so far;  

continue  to  engage  in  global  multilateral  fora  and  with  relevant  international  and  regional 
organisations (such as UNEP, Interpol, UNODC) to increase international cooperation against 
wildlife trafficking and forest crime and harness the transnational dimension of the problem; 
build  on  the  cooperation  with  the  ICCWC  with  the  aim  of  strengthening  police,  judicial 
systems and border controls of countries prone to illegal wildlife and forest trade; 

enhance effort to include in political dialogues with partner countries, as appropriate,  issues 
linked to tackling  environmental  crime,  particularly  with those  where environmental  crimes 
are most serious or recurrent; 

continue  to  enhance  cooperation  with  partner  countries  to  reduce  wildlife  (including 
poaching)  and  forest crime  for  example  through  building  the  capacity  of,  and  exploring  the  
relevant  stakeholders  working  along  the  value/supply  chain,  from  retailers  to  international 
traders and consumers while looking at the root causes of environmental crimes;  

continue  EU  support  to  partner  countries  in  implementing  related  Multilateral  Environment 
Agreements  concerning  waste  and  pollution-related  issues,  upgrading  regulations  and 
strengthening capacities to enforce them; 

closely follow international developments concerning the definition of and possible responses 
to ecocide27;  

  develop  options  for  setting  up  training  programmes  in  the  EU’s  neighbourhood  and  partner 
countries on the prevention and fight against environmental crime, both for law enforcement 
and judicial practitioners. Common Security and Defence Policy activities could contribute to 
these efforts; 

 

 

continue  its  direct  support  to  human  rights  defenders  at  risk  worldwide,  including 
environmental rights defenders, through the ‘EU Human Rights Defenders Mechanism’;  

continue  to  support  EU  partners  covered  by  enlargement  and  neighbourhood  policies,  e.g. 
through  capacity  building,  to  combat  environmental  crime  and  other  serious  offences, 
including  through  enhanced  effectiveness  of  environmental  inspections  and  administrative 
and criminal enforcement; and 

  promote  actions  to  raise  awareness  and  support  compliance  with  the  rules  of  international 

humanitarian law on the protection of the natural environment in armed conflicts. 

27 As concerns reflections  taking place in the context of  the Rome  Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), it is 
noteworthy that the European Union is not a party to the Rome Statute.  

9