Sittings · Document

OPINION (COM(2021)0851 – C90466/2021 – 2021/0422(COD)) 2022-12-07

On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the environment through criminal law and replacing Directive 2008/99/EC

Committee on Development · Rapporteur: Caroline Roose

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

According to the UNEP and INTERPOL, environmental crime is rising and has become the fourth largest criminal sector in the world putting at risk the environment, the biodiversity and the climate. It deprives countries and populations from billions of euros of economic revenues annually, especially in developing countries, and threaten human rights.

The current Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law aims primarily at improving environmental protection by means of harmonised criminal legislation. However, many shortcomings and loopholes have been identified, i.e. limited scope, inadequacy of sanctions, low levels of fines; lack of implementation and cooperation between Member States; lack of statistical data, etc.

The rapporteur welcomes the proposal made by the European Commission, notably regarding the broadening of its scope; the strengthening of its provisions related to criminal sanctions and the provision of mechanisms to protect environmental defenders. However, Rapporteur believes that further changes are needed to tackle environmental crime effectively.

First of all, an external dimension to the Directive should be introduced so as to take into account the transboundary character of environmental crime and its impacts on developing countries. The European Union has a particular responsibility in preventing and combating environmental offences in developing countries on several grounds. In some cases, the perpetrator is a European person or a person linked to the EU; the EU is an import or export area, a transition area and a major market, the value chains of some economic sectors is affected by these illegal activities and their leading companies are often headquartered in the EU.

In light of this, and given that human rights violations are often linked to the commission of environmental offences, the rapporteur suggests to amend Article 1 to putt an human rights approach at the core of the Directive.

The rapporteur proposes the inclusion of general and autonomous definitions of environmental offences. Despite the growing number of environmental crimes, a harmonised definition of environmental crimes does not yet exist either at the worldwide or at European and national level. Instead, the current system relies upon a list of secondary legislation, leaving out according large parts of EU environmental law. Therefore, criminalising autonomous crimes would enable criminal liability for serious cases of environmental harm and give rights to the nature. It is particularly relevant to tackle transnational organised environmental crime involving or taking place in developing countries.

The rapporteur is also in favour of introducing a crime of ecocide, in order to criminalise the most serious crimes to the environment. The EU should defend the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court to cover criminal acts that amount to ecocide. In parallel, the EU and its Member States should take the lead for its recognition. The introduction of a crime of ecocide in the remit of this Directive is of particular importance to preventing and prosecuting the most serious transnational environmental crimes taking place in developing countries. The definition used is the one developed by the Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide published in June 2021, a group of international criminal lawyers, environmental lawyers and legal scholars. It is the most comprehensive and recent definitional work available at the moment.

The rapporteur also proposes to enlarge the scope of the Directive, notably to fisheries crime and the exploitation and trade of illegal minerals. Serious breaches of the future Corporate Sustainable due diligence obligations and of the CSRD should be also considered criminal offences.

There is a significant amount of environmental crime linked to legal business and corporations and some corporations choose to be based in places with weak environmental regulations, as this is the case in many developing countries. Therefore, the rapporteur is of the opinion that Member States should have the obligation to establish their jurisdiction over offences committed for the benefit of a legal person established on their territory.

To reinforce cooperation with third countries, a new article is introduced, in line with SDG 17. It is estimated that billions of euros in revenues and taxes are annually stolen from developing countries, causing major economic losses. Hence, there is a need to step up development cooperation through increased financial and technical support to address environmental crime in developing countries.

To combat environmental crime effectively, the rapporteur suggests to introduce new provisions for assessing the damage to the environment as well as aggravating circumstances related i.e. to human rights violations, vulnerable groups and the rule of law systems. New sanctions shall equally be introduced, notably to compensate the damage made to the environment and to increase the maximum limits for penalties and sanctions to me them more dissuasive. Finally yet importantly, data collection and statistics must be improved.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Development calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a directive

Recitals 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1a) In accordance with Article 208 TFEU, the Union is to take account of the objectives of development cooperation in the policies that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries.

Amendment 2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1b) In accordance with Article 3(5) TEU, in its relations with the wider world, the Union is to uphold and promote its values and contribute to the protection of all human rights, in particular, the rights of the child, as well as the strict observance and development of international law.

Amendment 3

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1c) The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union recognises fundamental rights as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States and affirms that it is not be interpreted as restricting or adversely affecting human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognised in their respective fields of application by Union law, international law and by international agreements to which the Union and all Member States are party, including the European Convention for the Protection of Human rights and Fundamental Freedoms and by the Member States’ constitutions.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1d) The right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment has been recognised as a human right by the United Nations General Assembly in its recent resolution of 26 July 2022 (A/RES/76/300) where it affirmed that the promotion of those human rights requires the full implementation of the multilateral environmental agreements under the principles of international environmental law and called upon international organisations, States, businesses and other relevant stakeholders to adopt policies, to enhance international cooperation, strengthen capacity building and share good practices, in order to scale up efforts to ensure a clean, healthy and sustainable environment for all.

Amendment 5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) The Union continues to be concerned with the rise in environmental criminal offences and their effects, which undermine the effectiveness of Union environmental legislation. These offences are moreover increasingly extending beyond the borders of the Member States in which the offences are committed. Such offences pose a threat to the environment and therefore call for an appropriate and effective response.	(2) The Union continues to be concerned with the rise in environmental criminal offences and their effects, which undermine the effectiveness of Union environmental legislation. These offences are moreover increasingly extending beyond the borders of the Member States in which the offences are committed. In just a few decades, environmental crime has become the fourth largest criminal sector in the world, growing two to three times faster than the global economy, and it represents one to two times the size of global official development assistance (ODA) and is now as lucrative as drug trafficking. Such offences pose a threat to the environment and fundamental rights, entail habitat damage and biodiversity loss, amplify climate change, threaten the sustainable livelihood of vulnerable populations in developing countries, and create public health risks and therefore call for an appropriate and effective response. Environmental crime can also involve or take place in developing countries where shortcomings as regards the environmental rule of law have been identified, such as a lack of an adequate legal framework and governance structures, and a lack of information, implementation and enforcement. The Union has a particular responsibility in preventing and combating environmental offences in developing countries in cases in which the action can be linked to the Union. Such offences are not compatible with Union development policy and objectives or with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Amendment 6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) The existing systems of penalties under Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council20 and environmental sectoral law have not been sufficient in all environmental policy area to achieve compliance with Union law for the protection of the environment. Compliance should be strengthened by the availability of criminal penalties, which demonstrate social disapproval of a qualitatively different nature compared to administrative penalties.	(3) The existing systems of penalties under Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council20 and environmental sectoral law have not been sufficient in all environmental policy area to achieve compliance with Union law for the protection of the environment. Compliance should be strengthened by the availability of criminal penalties, which demonstrate social disapproval of a qualitatively different nature compared to administrative penalties and increase deterrence.
_________________	_________________
20 Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law (OJ L 328, 6.12.2008, p. 28).	20 Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law (OJ L 328, 6.12.2008, p. 28).

Amendment 7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(3a) Despite the growing number of environmental crimes, a harmonised and accepted definition of environmental crimes does not yet exist either at the global, Union or national level. This Directive aims to provide a general framework by defining autonomous environmental crime, in addition to the Union-wide common set of definitions of specific environmental offences.

Justification

Despite the growing number of environmental crimes, an harmonised definition of environmental crimes does not yet exist either at the worldwide or at EU and national level. The Commission's proposal fails to propose a general definition of environmental crime, which is one of the greatest obstacle to the fight against such offences. The objective of this amendment is to provide a definition of environmental autonomous offences to overcome the weaknesses related to the Commission’s sectoral approach and prevent any conduct that could create an immediate risk of substantial damage.

Amendment 8

Proposal for a directive

Recitals 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) Member States should provide for criminal penalties in their national legislation in respect of serious infringements of provisions of Union law concerning protection of the environment. In the framework of the common fisheries policy, Union law provides for comprehensive set of rules for control and enforcement under Regulation (EC) No 1224/200921 and Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 in case of serious infringements, including those that cause damage to the marine environment. Under this system the Member States have the choice between administrative and/or criminal sanctioning systems. In line with the Communication from the Commission on the European Green Deal22 and the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 203023, certain intentional unlawful conduct covered under Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 and Regulation (EC) 1005/200824 should be established as criminal offences.	(6) Member States should provide for criminal penalties in their national legislation in respect of serious infringements of provisions of Union law concerning protection of the environment. In the framework of the common fisheries policy, Union law provides for comprehensive set of rules for control and enforcement under Regulation (EC) No 1224/200921 and Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 in case of serious infringements, including those that cause damage to the marine environment. Under this system the Member States have the choice between administrative and/or criminal sanctioning systems. In line with the Communication from the Commission on the European Green Deal22 and the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 203023, all conduct deemed to be a serious infringement of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 and Regulation (EC) 1005/200824 should be established as criminal offences.
__________________	__________________
21 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 of 8 April 2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ L 112, 30.4.2011, p. 1–153).	21 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 of 8 April 2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ L 112, 30.4.2011, p. 1–153).
22 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS The European Green Deal, COM/2019/640 final.	22 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS The European Green Deal, COM/2019/640 final.
23 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 Bringing nature back into our lives, COM/2020/380 final	23 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 Bringing nature back into our lives, COM/2020/380 final
24 Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999, (OJ L 286, 29.10.2008, p. 1–32).	24 Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999, (OJ L 286, 29.10.2008, p. 1–32).

Amendment 9

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(6a) Over recent years, the Union has taken a leading role in ensuring that international supply chains of minerals are transparent and responsible. The adoption in 2017 of Regulation (EU) 2017/of the European Parliament and of the Council1a sent a clear international message that companies are expected to assess risks in their supply chains, and take the necessary measures to mitigate them. That Regulation currently focuses on risks of conflict financing, serious abuses of human rights and serious economic crimes. It is based on the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas which emphasizes the need for companies to identify and mitigate risks in their supply chains, to uphold human rights in producing countries and foster inclusion of legitimate small-scale miners and miners that use traditional methods.
	_______________
	1a Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas (OJ L 130, 19.5.2017, p. 1).

Amendment 10

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) A conduct should be considered unlawful also when it is carried out under an authorisation by a competent authority in a Member State if such authorisation was obtained fraudulently, or by corruption, extortion or coercion. Moreover, operators should take the necessary steps to comply with the legislative, regulatory and administrative provisions concerning the protection of environment applicable when they carry out the respective activity, including by complying with their obligations, as laid down in applicable EU and national laws, in procedures governing amendments or updates to existing authorisations.	(8) A conduct should be considered unlawful also when it is carried out under an authorisation by a competent authority in a Member State or in a developing country if such authorisation was obtained fraudulently, or by corruption, extortion or coercion. Moreover, operators should take the necessary steps to comply with the legislative, regulatory and administrative provisions concerning the protection of environment applicable when they carry out the respective activity, including by complying with their obligations, as laid down in applicable EU and national laws, in procedures governing amendments or updates to existing authorisations.

Amendment 11

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(11a) Environmental crimes can be perpetrated by a range of state and non-state actors, from individuals, small groups, companies, government individuals, to organised criminal networks, and often a combination thereof. Transnational companies can be the perpetrators due to inter alia, their exploitation of the environment and the damage they cause to the environment, in order to generate more profit or reduce their costs, in particular in developing countries where the legal and institutional frameworks are usually weaker. In relation to transnational companies, other actors can also be at fault and the responsibility should, therefore, be shared and accompanied by penalties as appropriate.

Amendment 12

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12) In criminal proceedings and trials, due account should be taken of the involvement of organised criminal groups operating in ways that negatively impact the environment. Criminal proceedings should address corruption, money laundering, cyber-crime and document fraud and – in relation to business activities – the intention of the offender to maximise profits or save expenses, where these occur in the context of environmental crime. These crime forms are often interconnected with serious environmental crime forms and should therefore not be dealt with in isolation. In this respect, it is of particular concern that some environmental crimes are committed with the tolerance or active support of the competent administrations or officials performing his/her public duty. In certain cases this can even take the form of corruption. Examples of such behaviours are turning a blind eye or remaining silent on the infringement of laws protecting the environment following inspections, deliberately omitting inspections or controls for example with regard to whether the conditions of a permit are being respected by the permit-holder, resolutions or votes in favour of granting illegal licences or issuing falsified or untrue favourable reports.	(12) In criminal proceedings and trials, due account should be taken of the involvement of organised criminal groups operating in ways that negatively impact the environment. Criminal proceedings should address corruption, money laundering, cyber-crime and document fraud and – in relation to business activities – the intention of the offender to maximise profits or save expenses, where these occur in the context of environmental crime. These crime forms are often interconnected with serious environmental crime forms and should therefore not be dealt with in isolation. Given the importance of corporate environmental crime, improving transparency in corporate supply and value chains is necessary. Transparency with regard to beneficial ownership of companies, in particular, is key to prosecuting environmental crime, for example concerning illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing or illegal wildlife trafficking. Therefore, Member States should in parallel ensure full implementation of Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a. It is of particular concern that some environmental crimes are committed with the tolerance or active support of the competent administrations or officials performing his/her public duty which can take the form of corruption. Examples of such behaviours are turning a blind eye or remaining silent on the infringement of laws protecting the environment following inspections, deliberately omitting inspections or controls for example with regard to whether the conditions of a permit are being respected by the permit-holder, resolutions or votes in favour of granting illegal licences or issuing falsified or untrue favourable reports or, especially in developing countries, promoting the prosecution of environmental defenders who act against environmental crime.
	__________________
	1a Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive (EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, and amending Directives 2009/138/EC and 2013/36/EU (OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 43).

Amendment 13

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) Sanctions for the offences should be effective, dissuasive and proportionate. To this end, minimum levels for the maximum term of imprisonment should be set for natural persons. Accessory sanctions are often seen as being more effective than financial sanctions especially for legal persons. Additional sanctions or measures should be therefore available in criminal proceedings. These should include the obligation to reinstate the environment, exclusion from access to public funding, including tender procedures, grants and concessions and withdrawal of permits and authorisations. This is without prejudice to the discretion of judges or courts in criminal proceedings to impose appropriate sanctions in the individual cases.	(14) Sanctions for the offences should be effective, dissuasive and proportionate. To this end, minimum levels for the maximum term of imprisonment should be set for natural persons. Accessory sanctions are often seen as being more effective than financial sanctions especially for legal persons. Additional sanctions or measures should be therefore available in criminal proceedings. These should include the obligation to reinstate the environment, compensation for the damage caused, exclusion from access to public funding, including tender procedures, grants and concessions and withdrawal of permits and authorisations. Sanctions that are designed to ensure that crimes are not repeated are very important. Effective remedies, including redress, mitigation and adaptation measures and injunctions should also be provided. This is without prejudice to the discretion of judges or courts in criminal proceedings to impose appropriate sanctions in the individual cases.

Amendment 14

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(14a) In order for sanctions to be effective it is also necessary to introduce in this Directive the environmental restorative justice approach, which has long been called for by civil society and specialised organisations. The restorative model has a preventive approach, aimed at repairing the damage caused and creating the environmental awareness necessary to avoid such damage in the future. It can be done through, among other means, environmental recovery funds, environmental social projects or community services for the benefit of the environment. Environmental restorative justice also aims to allow the participation of victims in the process of the determination of the sanctions and, in the future, of the environmental management of the corporations that are sanctioned.

Amendment 15

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) Where national law provides for it, legal persons should also be held criminally liable for environmental criminal offences according to this Directive. Member States whose national law does not provide for the criminal liability of legal persons should ensure that their administrative sanctioning systems provide for effective, dissuasive and proportionate sanctions types and levels as laid down in this Directive in order to achieve its objectives. Financial situation of legal persons should be taken into account to ensure the dissuasiveness of the sanction imposed.	(15) Legal persons should also be held criminally liable for environmental criminal offences according to this Directive. Like natural persons, legal persons who are perpetrators, instigators or accomplices in offences should be held responsible and subject to criminal proceedings. Member States whose national law does not provide for the criminal liability of legal persons should ensure that their administrative sanctioning systems provide for effective, dissuasive and proportionate sanctions types and levels as laid down in this Directive in order to achieve its objectives. Financial situation of legal persons should be taken into account to ensure the dissuasiveness of the sanction imposed.

Amendment 16

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(16) A further approximation and effectiveness of sanction levels imposed in practice should be fostered through common aggravating circumstances that reflect the severity of the crime committed. Where the death of, or serious injury to, a person, have been caused and where these elements are not already constituent for the criminal offence, these could be considered as aggravating circumstances. Equally, when an environmental criminal offence causes substantial and irreversible or long-lasting damage to an entire ecosystem, this should be an aggravating circumstance because of its severity, including in cases comparable to ecocide. As the illegal profits or expenditure that can be generated or avoided through environmental crime are an important incentive for criminals, these should be taken into account when determining the appropriate level of sanctioning in the individual case.	(16) A further approximation and effectiveness of sanction levels imposed in practice should be fostered through common aggravating circumstances that reflect the severity of the crime committed. Where the death of, or serious injury to, a person, have been caused and where these elements are not already constituent for the criminal offence, these could be considered as aggravating circumstances. Equally, when an environmental criminal offence causes substantial and irreversible or long-lasting damage to an entire ecosystem, this should be an aggravating circumstance because of its severity, including in cases comparable to ecocide. As the illegal profits or expenditure that can be generated or avoided through environmental crime are an important incentive for criminals and often fuel organised crime, these should be taken into account when determining the appropriate level of sanctioning in the individual case. Finally, the severity of human rights impacts, the vulnerability of human victims, as well as any abuse of existing legal and institutional weaknesses of developing countries or the gross violation of due diligence obligations should also be considered to be aggravating circumstances.

Amendment 17

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(16a) While the recognition of the crime of ecocide is currently being discussed in several national parliaments around the world, the Union should seize the opportunity to remain a world leader in environmental protection legislation and to provide for a harmonised definition and maximum limits for sanctions. Member States should therefore introduce a crime of ecocide, which should be considered a criminal offence for the purposes of this Directive and be defined as unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused. That specific crime would make it possible to identify the most serious damage to the environment and thus to provide for a graduation of sanctions according to the gravity of the harm to the environment

Justification

On several occasions, the European Parliament has called for the establishment of ecocide as a criminal offence to safeguard human rights and democracy, biodiversity, the climate and environmental defenders. The definition used is the one developed by the Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide published in June 2021, a group of international criminal lawyers, environmental lawyers and legal scholars. It is the most comprehensive and recent definitional work available at the moment.

Amendment 18

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(19) Member States should lay down rules concerning limitation periods necessary in order to enable them to counter environmental criminal offences effectively, without prejudice to national rules that do not set limitation periods for investigation, prosecution and enforcement.	(19) Member States should lay down rules concerning limitation periods necessary in order to enable them to counter environmental criminal offences effectively, without prejudice to national rules that do not set limitation periods for investigation, prosecution and enforcement. For the investigation, prosecution, trial and adjudication of ecocide offences there should not be a limitation period.

Amendment 19

Proposal for a directive

Recital 20

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) The obligations in this Directive to provide for criminal penalties should not exempt Member States from the obligation to provide for administrative sanctions and other measures in national law for breaches established in Union environmental legislation.	(20) The obligations in this Directive to provide for criminal penalties should not exempt Member States from the obligation to provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive administrative sanctions and other measures in national law for breaches established in Union environmental legislation.

Amendment 20

Proposal for a directive

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(23) Given, in particular, the mobility of perpetrators of illegal conduct covered by this Directive, together with the cross-border nature of offences and the possibility of cross-border investigations, Member States should establish jurisdiction in order to counter such conduct effectively.	(23) Given, in particular, the mobility of perpetrators of illegal conduct covered by this Directive, together with the cross-border nature of offences and the possibility of cross-border investigations, including conduct carried out in developing countries, Member States should establish jurisdiction in order to counter such conduct effectively. Member States should thus extend their jurisdiction where an offence creates a risk for the environment on their territories, where the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established in their territories, where it is committed against their residents, or where it is committed in third countries by a Union citizen or a legal person established in the Union.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a directive

Recital 24 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(24a) Environmental defenders who directly protect ecosystems are also often on the frontline of the consequences of environmental crime worldwide, including in the Union. They could be directly threatened, intimidated, persecuted, harassed or even murdered by perpetrators, and as such should also benefit from balanced and effective protection. The establishment of an independent special rapporteur on environmental rights defenders under the Aarhus Convention, and consequently the establishment of protection measures, is also a way to better fight environmental crime.

Amendment 22

Proposal for a directive

Recital 24 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(24b) In its resolution of 11 November 2021 on strengthening democracy and media freedom and pluralism in the EU: the undue use of actions under civil and criminal law to silence journalists, NGOs and civil society1a, the European Parliament noted that environmental defenders could also be subject to abusive lawsuits and threats, and should be protected from such abusive practices, also known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.
	____________________
	1a OJ C 205, 20.5.2022, p. 2.

Amendment 23

Proposal for a directive

Recital 26 a (new)

	(26a) Nature can be considered the victim of the damage caused by environmental crimes. Some countries have already granted legal personality to ecosystems even at the constitutional level (as in Ecuador or Bolivia). In Colombia the Constitutional Court granted those rights in the Atrato River ruling T-622-16. Canada and New Zealand are two other countries where nature has been granted legal personality. In the Union, some Member States are in the process of constitutional reforms to incorporate the rights of nature at the highest level. Spain for instance recognised legal personality of the Mar Menor Lagoon and its basin by means of the recent law 19/2022, of 30 September 2022. The Union could take into account the existing legal frameworks in developing countries and in Member States as well as ongoing reform processes within the Union and provide sound legislation that would incorporate a long-term vision by taking into account future legal developments that have begun in the Union.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a directive

Recital 31 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(31a) Due to its global impact and cross-border nature, and in line with Sustainable Development Goal 17, cooperation with third countries and, in particular with developing countries should be intensified, in particular by adopting and supporting effective measures and mechanisms to increase coordination and cross-border cooperation in order to combat environmental transnational crime. It is estimated that billions of euros in revenues and taxes are annually stolen from developing countries, causing major economic losses. Member States should seek to step up development cooperation through increased financial and technical support to address environmental crime in developing countries.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a directive

Recital 31 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(31b) The Union and its Member States should also make the fight against environmental crime a strategic political priority in international judicial cooperation and within the institutions and the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in particular by promoting compliance with multilateral environmental agreements through the adoption of criminal sanctions and the exchange of best practices and data on environmental crime. This international approach to environmental crime should also include extending the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court to the crime of ecocide, and the Union and its Member States should have a key role and responsibility in that regard.

Amendment 26

Proposal for a directive

Recital 32

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(32) To effectively tackle the criminal offences referred to in this Directive, it is necessary that competent authorities in the Member States collect accurate, consistent and comparable data on the scale of and trends in environmental offences and the efforts to combat them and their results. These data should be used for preparing statistics to serve the operational and strategic planning of enforcement activities as well as for providing information to citizens. Member States should collect and report to the Commission relevant statistical data on environmental offences. The Commission should regularly assess and publish the results based on the data transmitted by the Member States.	(32) To effectively tackle the criminal offences referred to in this Directive, it is necessary that competent authorities in the Member States collect accurate, consistent and comparable data on the scale of and trends in environmental offences and the efforts to combat them and their results. These data should be used for preparing statistics to serve the operational and strategic planning of enforcement activities as well as for providing information to citizens. There are major gaps in knowledge both at international and Union level. Data remain limited, there is a lack of statistics on environmental-related offences, their impacts on local communities, offenders and sanctions given. Data concerning the number of transnational environmental crime cases disaggregated by countries where the environmental offense was committed, the value of proceeds seized, frozen or confiscated, information about whether the environmental offence constitutes a predicate offense for a money laundering crime, the number and characteristics of victims or groups of victims, including local communities affected, are important data that would allow the design of better policies and strategies to prevent and combat those crimes in developing countries. Member States should collect and report to the Commission relevant statistical data on environmental offences, in particular specifying the sanctions imposed on the perpetrators of offences. The Commission should regularly assess and publish the results based on the data transmitted by the Member States.

Amendment 27

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Directive establishes minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions in order to protect the environment more effectively.	This Directive establishes minimum rules concerning the definition of environmental criminal offences and sanctions in order to protect the environment, prevent and combat environmental crime more effectively, and thereby prevent human rights violations and abuses resulting from environmental criminal offences.

Amendment 28

Proposal for a directive

Article 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Article 2	Article 2
Definitions	Definitions
For the purpose of this Directive, the following definitions apply:	For the purpose of this Directive, the following definitions apply:
(1) ‘unlawful’ means a conduct infringing one of the following:	(1) ‘unlawful’ means a conduct infringing one of the following:
(a) Union legislation, which irrespective of its legal basis contributes to the pursuit of the objectives of Union policy of protecting the environment as set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;	(a) Union legislation, which irrespective of its legal basis contributes to the pursuit of the objectives of Union policy of protecting the environment as set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
(b) a law, an administrative regulation of a Member State or a decision taken by a competent authority of a Member State that gives effect to the Union legislation referred to in point (a).	(b) a law, an administrative regulation of a Member State or a decision taken by a competent authority of a Member State that gives effect to the Union legislation referred to in point (a).
The conduct shall be deemed unlawful even if carried out under an authorisation by a competent authority in a Member State when the authorisation was obtained fraudulently or by corruption, extortion or coercion;	The conduct shall be deemed unlawful even if carried out under an authorisation by a competent authority in a Member State, or in a third country where the conduct was carried out by a Union citizen or a legal person established in the Union, when the authorisation was obtained fraudulently or by corruption, extortion or coercion;
	(1a) ‘environment’ means the earth, its biosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, as well as outer space, including the integrity of all the biotic and abiotic elements of an ecosystem, their functions, services and mutual interactions and the planetary boundaries;
	(1b) ‘severe damage’ means damage which involves very serious adverse changes, disruption or harm to any element of the environment, including grave impacts on human life, or natural, cultural or economic resources;
	(1c) ‘widespread damage’ means damage which extends beyond a limited geographic area, crosses state boundaries, or is suffered by an entire ecosystem or species or a large number of human beings;
	(1d) ‘long-term damage’ means damage which is irreversible or which cannot be redressed through natural recovery within a reasonable period of time;
	(1e) ‘wanton’ means with reckless disregard for damage which would be clearly excessive in relation to the social and economic benefits anticipated;
	(1f) ‘planetary boundaries’ means the nine planetary life-support systems identified as part of the planetary boundaries framework: climate change, biosphere integrity (covering functional and genetic diversity), land system changes, freshwater use, biogeochemical flows (nitrogen and phosphorus), ocean acidification, atmospheric aerosol pollution, stratospheric ozone depletion and novel entities;
(2) ‘habitat within a protected site’ means any habitat of species for which an area is classified as a special protection area pursuant to Article 4(1) or (2) of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council30, or any natural habitat or a habitat of species for which a site is designated as a special area of conservation pursuant to Article 4(4) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC31;	(2) ‘habitat within a protected site’ means any habitat of species for which an area is classified as a special protection area pursuant to Article 4(1) or (2) of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council30, or any natural habitat or a habitat of species for which a site is designated as a special area of conservation pursuant to Article 4(4) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC31;
(3) ‘legal person’ means any legal entity having such status under the applicable national law, except for States or public bodies exercising State authority and for public international organisations;	(3) ‘legal person’ means any legal entity having such status under the applicable national law, including States or public bodies exercising State authority and public international organisations;
(4) ‘public concerned’ means the persons affected or likely to be affected by the offences referred to in Articles 3 or 4. For the purposes of this definition, persons having a sufficient interest or maintaining the impairment of a right as well as non-governmental organisations promoting the protection of the environment and meeting any proportionate requirements under national law shall be deemed to have an interest;	(4) ‘public concerned’ means the persons or groups of persons including local communities affected or likely to be affected by the offences referred to in Articles 3 or 4. For the purposes of this definition, persons having a sufficient interest or maintaining the impairment of a right as well as non-governmental organisations promoting the protection of the environment and of the human rights and meeting any proportionate requirements under national law shall be deemed to have an interest;
(5) ‘victim’ has the meaning attributed to it in Article 2(1) point (a) of Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council32.	(5) ‘victim’ means:
	(i) natural persons, including future generations, who, individually or collectively, have suffered or are likely to suffer harm, including physical, mental or emotional harm, economic loss, loss of culture, traditions, traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources, or substantial impairment or abuse of their human rights due to an environmental criminal offence;
	(ii) relatives of a person whose death was directly caused by an environmental criminal offence and who have suffered harm as a result of that person’s death;
	(iii) legal persons who have suffered or are likely to suffer loss, including economic loss.
_________________	__________________
30 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).	30 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).
31 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).	31 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).
32 Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, (OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57–73).

Amendment 29

Proposal for a directive

Article 3

Amendment 30

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 3a (new)
	Ecocide
	Member States shall introduce in their national law a crime of ecocide, which shall be considered a serious criminal offence for the purposes of this Directive and shall be defined as unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused.

Amendment 31

Proposal for a directive

Article 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Article 4	Article 4
Inciting, aiding and abetting and attempt	Inciting, aiding and abetting and attempt
1. Member States shall ensure that inciting, and aiding and abetting the commission of any of the criminal offences referred to in Article 3(1) are punishable as criminal offences.	1. Member States shall ensure that inciting, and aiding and abetting the commission of any of the criminal offences referred to in Article 3(-1), (-1a) and (1) or Article 3a are punishable as criminal offences.
2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that an attempt to commit any of the criminal offences referred to in Article 3 (1) points (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (h), (i), (j), (k), (m), (n), (p) (ii), (q), (r) when committed intentionally is punishable as a criminal offence.	2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that an attempt to commit any of the criminal offences referred to in Article 3(-1), (-1a) and (1) or Article 3a when committed intentionally is punishable as a criminal offence.

Amendment 32

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 are punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties.	1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences referred to in Articles 3, 3a and 4 are punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties.

Amendment 33

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that offences referred to in Article 3 are punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least ten years if they cause or are likely to cause death or serious injury to any person.	2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that offences referred to in Article 3 and 3a are punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least ten years if they cause or are likely to cause death or serious injury to any person or group of persons or other serious human rights violations.

Amendment 34

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that natural persons who have committed the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 may be subject to additional sanctions or measures which shall include:	5. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that natural persons who have committed the offences referred to in Articles 3, 3a and 4 may be subject to additional sanctions or measures which shall include:
(a) obligation to reinstate the environment within a given time period;	(a) obligation to reinstate the environment within a given time period;
(b) fines;	(b) fines which shall be proportional to the damage caused by the offence;
(c) temporary or permanent exclusions from access to public funding, including tender procedures, grants and concessions;	(c) temporary or permanent exclusions from access to public funding, including tender procedures, grants and concessions and licences;
(d) disqualification from directing establishments of the type used for committing the offence;	(d) disqualification from directing establishments of the type used for committing the offence;
(e) withdrawal of permits and authorisations to pursue activities which have resulted in committing the offence;	(e) withdrawal of permits and authorisations to pursue activities which have resulted in committing the offence;
	(ea) bans on the pursuit of activities which have resulted in committing the offence;
(f) temporary bans on running for elected or public office;	(f) temporary bans on running for elected or public office;
(g) national or Union-wide publication of the judicial decision relating to the conviction or any sanctions or measures applied.	(g) national or Union-wide publication of the judicial decision relating to the conviction or any sanctions or measures applied.

Amendment 35

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Member States shall also ensure that legal persons can be held liable where the lack of supervision or control by a person referred to in paragraph 1 has made possible the commission of an offence referred to in Articles 3 and 4 for the benefit of the legal person by a person under its authority.	2. Member States shall also ensure that legal persons can be held liable where the lack of supervision or control of their supply chains by a person referred to in paragraph 1 has made possible the commission of an offence referred to in Articles 3, 3a and 4 for the benefit of the legal person by a person under its authority.

Amendment 36

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Liability of legal persons under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not exclude criminal proceedings against natural persons who are perpetrators, inciters or accessories in the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4.	3. Liability of legal persons under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not exclude criminal proceedings against natural persons who are perpetrators, inciters or accessories in the offences referred to in Articles 3, 3a and 4.

Amendment 37

Proposal for a directive

Article 7

Amendment 38

Proposal for a directive

Article 8

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Article 8	Article 8
Aggravating circumstances	Aggravating circumstances
In so far as the following circumstances do not already form part of the constituent elements of the criminal offences referred to in Article 3, Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that, in relation to the relevant offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4, the following circumstances may be regarded as aggravating circumstances:	In so far as the following circumstances do not already form part of the constituent elements of the criminal offences referred to in Article 3, Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that, in relation to the relevant offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4, the following circumstances may be regarded as aggravating circumstances:
(a) the offence caused the death of, or serious injury to, a person;	(a) the offence caused the death of, or serious injury to, a person or groups of persons;
	(aa) the offence caused severe impacts on the human rights of the population or local communities of a developing country where the environmental damage has occurred or substantial economic loss or loss to the culture and tradition of such population or local communities;
	(ab) the offence affected or is likely to affect vulnerable groups such as children, youth, women, people with disabilities, elderly or indigenous communities;
	(ac) the offence has caused or will cause serious damage to future generations;
	(a d) the offence was committed by abusing existing weaknesses in the rule of law and governance systems of developing countries and, in particular, by mediating corruption, intimidation or violence;
	(a e) the offence was committed in gross violation of the existing due diligence systems or with non-compliance with the related decisions of the competent authorities;
(b) the offence caused destruction or irreversible or long-lasting substantial damage to an ecosystem;	(b) the offence caused destruction or irreversible or long-lasting substantial damage to an ecosystem;
	(ba) the offence damaged a legally protected area in a third country;
(c) the offence was committed in the framework of a criminal organisation within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA ;	(c) the offence was committed in the framework of a criminal organisation within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA ;
(d) the offence involved the use of false or forged documents;	(d) the offence involved the use of false or forged documents or serious violation of Directive (EU) xxx/xxx [Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive];
(e) the offence was committed by a public official when performing his/her duties;	(e) the offence was committed by a public official when performing his/her duties;
	(ea) the offender holds a political position or has been entrusted with prominent public functions;
(f) the offender committed similar previous infringements of environmental law;	(f) the offender committed similar previous infringements of environmental law;
	(fa) the offence was committed together with other crimes;
(g) the offence generated or was expected to generate substantial financial benefits, or avoided substantial expenses, directly or indirectly;	(g) the offence generated or was expected to generate substantial financial benefits, or avoided substantial expenses, directly or indirectly;
(h) the offender's conduct gives rise to liability for environmental damage but the offender does not fulfil their obligations to take remedial action under Article 6 of Directive 2004/35/EC57;	(h) the offender's conduct gives rise to liability for environmental damage but the offender does not fulfil their obligations to take remedial action under Article 6 of Directive 2004/35/E57;
(i) the offender does not provide assistance to inspection and other enforcement authorities when legally required;	(i) the offender does not provide assistance to inspection and other enforcement authorities when legally required;
(j) the offender actively obstructs inspection, custom controls or investigation activities, or intimidates or interferes with witnesses or complainants.	(j) the offender actively obstructs inspection, custom controls or investigation activities, or intimidates or interferes with witnesses or complainants;
	(ja) the offence has caused serious injuries to or the death of human rights or environmental defenders, journalists, members of NGOs or persons reporting criminal offences or it entails coercing or attacking such persons.
_________________	__________________
57 Directive 2004/35/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage (OJ L 143, 30.4.2004, p. 56–75).	57 Directive 2004/35/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage (OJ L 143, 30.4.2004, p. 56–75).

Amendment 39

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the offender restores nature to its previous condition;	(a) the offender restores nature to its previous condition or pays fair compensation to the victims;

Amendment 40

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(b a) the offender admits his or her guilt and pays compensation that is sufficient to deal with the damage caused to the environment and fair compensation to the victims;

Justification

It is important to allow the reduction of the penalty if the offender admits his guilt in order to reduce the time of the investigations, the cost of the procedures and to conclude the process as soon as possible providing in this way timely justice to the victims and avoiding further suffering. The reduction of the penalty should be conditioned to a fair compensation to the victims and the environment.

Amendment 41

Proposal for a directive

Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Member States shall adopt the necessary measures so that the confiscated assets are integrated into social funds dedicated to carrying out environmental repair projects in the affected environments and the affected local communities, especially in developing countries.

Justification

As some States already do with assets seized in drug crime, the profits and instruments of environmental crime can be linked to the rehabilitation of natural spaces or the improvement of actions to prosecute environmental crimes, through the creation of social or environmental funds for confiscated assets. In this way, in addition, the fight against environmental crime is projected to society in a more direct and visible way.

Amendment 42

Proposal for a directive

Article 10 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the return of confiscated funds or assets of environmental crime perpetrators to the developing countries where the offence was committed, while ensuring that they are used for appropriate purposes such as restoring the environmental damages, compensating the victims and local communities, improving the living conditions of the affected population or strengthening the rule of law systems of the developing country concerned.

Justification

Many environmental crimes committed in developing countries are linked to organised crime and money laundering. Target 16.4 of 2030 Agenda establishes the objective of “strengthening the recovery and return of stolen assets”. This directive represents an opportunity for the Union to contribute to achieving this goal by allowing the proceeds of environmental crimes committed in developing countries but prosecuted and judged in Member States to be returned to these countries while ensuring they are used for appropriate purposes.

Amendment 43

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to provide for a limitation period that enables the investigation, prosecution, trial and judicial adjudication of criminal offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 for a sufficient period of time after the commission of those criminal offences, in order for those criminal offences to be tackled effectively.	1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to provide for a limitation period that enables the investigation, prosecution, trial and judicial adjudication of criminal offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 for a sufficient period of time after the commission of those criminal offences or the date on which the environmental damage or human rights violation was known or revealed in order for those criminal offences to be tackled effectively, in particular, where the environmental crime has a transnational nature, has been committed in a developing country and involved organised crime. For the investigation, prosecution, trial and adjudication of criminal offences referred in Article 3a there shall not be a limitation period.

Amendment 44

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the limitation period for criminal offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 does not commence until the scope of the damage to the environment has been fully established by appropriate scientific means.

Amendment 45

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Member States may establish a limitation period that is shorter than ten years, but not shorter than four years, provided that the period may be interrupted or suspended in the event of specified acts.	deleted

Amendment 46

Proposal for a directive

Article 12 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 where:	1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Articles 3 , 3a and 4 where:
(a) the offence was committed in whole or in part on its territory;	(a) the offence was committed in whole or in part on its territory;
(b) the offence was committed on board a ship or an aircraft registered in it or flying its flag;	(b) the offence was committed on board a ship or an aircraft registered in it or flying its flag;
(c) the damage occurred on its territory;	(c) the damage occurred on its territory;
(d) the offender is one of its nationals or habitual residents.	(d) the offender is one of its nationals or habitual residents, regardless of whether the offence takes place in a Member State or a third country;
	(da) the offence was committed for the benefit of a legal person established on its territory.

Amendment 47

Proposal for a directive

Article 12 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. A Member State shall inform the Commission where it decides to extend its jurisdiction to offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 which have been committed outside its territory, where:	2. A Member State shall take the necessary measures to extend its jurisdiction to offences referred to in Articles 3, 3a and 4 which have been committed outside its territory, where:
(a) the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established on its territory;	(a) the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established on its territory;
(b) the offence is committed against one of its nationals or its habitual residents;	(b) the offence is committed against one of its nationals or its habitual residents;
(c) the offence has created a severe risk for the environment on its territory.	(c) the offence has created a severe risk for the environment or for biodiversity on its territory.
Where an offence referred to in Articles 3 and 4 falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State, these Member States shall cooperate to determine which Member State shall conduct criminal proceedings. The matter shall, where appropriate and in accordance with Article 12 of Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA59, be referred to Eurojust.	Where an offence referred to in Articles 3 and 4 falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State, these Member States shall cooperate to determine which Member State shall conduct criminal proceedings. The matter shall, where appropriate and in accordance with Article 12 of Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA59, be referred to Eurojust.
_________________	__________________
59 Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA of 30 November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings (OJ L 328, 15.12.2009, p. 42).	59 Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA of 30 November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings (OJ L 328, 15.12.2009, p. 42).

Amendment 48

Proposal for a directive

Article 12 – paragraph 3 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3b. Member States shall introduce universal jurisdiction for their courts for the prosecution and judgement of an offence referred to in Article 3a, in order to avoid the externalisation of environmental damage, where it was not committed on its territory, was committed by a third-country national, involved a victim from a third country, and the environment of that Member State has not been affected or damaged.

Justification

Environmental crimes are very often cross-border in nature. To avoid the externalisation of environmental damage, it should be possible to prosecute a legal or natural person for crimes committed in a third country, in particular in the case of ecocide.

Amendment 49

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that protection granted under Directive (EU) 2019/1937, is applicable to persons reporting criminal offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 of this Directive.	1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that protection granted under Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 is applicable to natural and legal persons reporting criminal offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 of this Directive.

Amendment 50

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that persons reporting offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 of this Directive and providing evidence or otherwise cooperating with the investigation, prosecution or adjudication of such offences are provided the necessary support and assistance in the context of criminal proceedings.	2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that natural and legal persons reporting offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 of this Directive and providing evidence or otherwise cooperating with the investigation, prosecution or adjudication of such offences are provided the necessary support and assistance in the context of criminal proceedings.

Justification

Both natural and legal persons should be protected when they report environmental offences or assist the investigation. Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), which are often at the forefront of detecting environmental crime need to be protected as well.

Amendment 51

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Member States shall ensure that, in accordance with their national legal system, members of the public concerned have appropriate rights to participate in proceedings concerning offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4, for instance as a civil party.	Member States shall ensure that, in accordance with their national legal system, members of the public concerned have appropriate rights to participate in proceedings concerning offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4, for instance as a civil party or as a private prosecutor.

Amendment 52

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Member States shall ensure that, the following information is considered to be in the public interest and made available to the public concerned:
	(a) any final judgement in a trial;
	(b) information enabling the members of the public concerned to know about the state of the proceedings, unless in exceptional cases the proper handling of the case might be adversely affected by such disclosure of information.

Justification

A minimum level of rights should be awarded to the general public in its capacity of exercising representation of nature as a victim of an environmental crime.

Amendment 53

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Member States shall take appropriate action, such as information and awareness-raising campaigns and research and education programmes, to reduce overall environmental criminal offences, raise public awareness and reduce the risk of population of becoming a victim of an environmental criminal offence. Where appropriate, Member States shall act in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders.	Member States shall take appropriate action, such as the improvement of the preventive law enforcement tools, information and awareness-raising campaigns and research and education programmes, to reduce overall environmental criminal offences, raise public awareness and reduce the risk of population of becoming a victim of an environmental criminal offence. Where appropriate, Member States shall act in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders.

Amendment 54

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Member States shall also ensure an effective implementation and enforcement of national and Union environmental due diligence obligations in the supply chains of their natural and legal persons operating in developing countries as set out in Directive (EU) xxx/xxx [Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive].

Amendment 55

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 15a
	The reinforcement of the administrative inspections systems and the use of new technologies, such as the use of Earth observation, shall be enhanced to prevent and detect environmental crimes, in particular those committed in developing countries.

Amendment 56

Proposal for a directive

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Member States shall ensure that national authorities which detect, investigate, prosecute or adjudicate environmental offences have a sufficient number of qualified staff and sufficient financial, technical and technological resources necessary for the effective performance of their functions related to the implementation of this Directive.	Member States shall ensure that national authorities which prevent, detect, investigate, prosecute or adjudicate environmental offences have a sufficient number of qualified staff and sufficient financial, technical and technological resources necessary for the effective performance of their functions related to the implementation of this Directive.

Amendment 57

Proposal for a directive

Article 17 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Without prejudice to judicial independence and differences in the organisation of the judiciary across the Union, Member States shall request those responsible for the training of judges, prosecutors, police, judicial staff and competent authorities’ staff involved in criminal proceedings and investigations to provide at regular intervals specialised training with respect to the objectives of this Directive and appropriate to the functions of the involved staff and authorities.	Without prejudice to judicial independence and differences in the organisation of the judiciary across the Union, Member States shall request those responsible for the training of judges, prosecutors, police, judicial staff and competent authorities’ staff involved in criminal proceedings and investigations, including environmental experts, to provide at regular intervals specialised training, especially in the case of environmental crime committed within the framework of criminal organisations with respect to the objectives of this Directive and appropriate to the functions of the involved staff and authorities. Specialised training courses on the investigation and prosecution of transnational environmental crimes shall be given particular attention.

Amendment 58

Proposal for a directive

Article 18 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that effective investigative tools, such as those which are used in organised crime or other serious crime cases, are also available for investigating or prosecuting offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4.	Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that effective investigative tools, such as those which are used in organised crime, cybercrime, financial crime or other serious crime cases, are also available for investigating or prosecuting offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4.

Amendment 59

Proposal for a directive

Article 19 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 19a
	Cooperation among Member States, with the Union bodies, offices and agencies and with developing countries
	1. Member States shall ensure effective coordination and cross-border cooperation with other Member States and with the Union, including its specialized bodies, offices and agencies, such as the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.
	2. Member States shall intensify international judicial cooperation and, in particular, cooperation with developing countries in order to strengthen their rule of law and governance systems with a view to implementing effective mechanisms to prevent and combat environmental crime.
	3. The Commission shall make more efforts to improve international and development cooperation and supporting developing countries, by taking effective measures to improve capacity building, in particular the establishment of technical assistance programmes, to enable them to improve their administrative, judicial and legal systems, with the aim of preventing and combating environmental crime more effectively.

Amendment 60

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the objectives and priorities of national policy in this area of offence;	(a) the objectives and priorities of national policy in this area of offence including the prevention and combatting of transnational environmental organised crime, as well as corruption and money-laundering linked to such crimes when affecting developing countries;

Amendment 61

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the roles and responsibilities of all the competent authorities involved in countering this type of offence;	(b) the roles and responsibilities of all the competent authorities involved in countering this type of offence, as well as other actors, such as civil society and the private sector;

Amendment 62

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the modes of coordination and cooperation between the competent authorities;	(c) the modes of coordination and cooperation between the competent authorities and with other actors such as civil society;

Amendment 63

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the resources needed and how specialisation of enforcement professionals will be supported;	(e) the resources needed and allocated and how specialisation of enforcement professionals will be supported, and how multidisciplinary approaches will be included in training programmes;

Amendment 64

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) the procedures and mechanisms for regular monitoring and evaluation of the results achieved;	(f) the procedures and mechanisms for regular monitoring and evaluation of the results achieved including the baseline and the indicators used;

Amendment 65

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ga) assistance to, and protection of, victims in developing countries, in particular those in vulnerable situations, including environmental defenders;

Amendment 66

Proposal for a directive

Article 21 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The statistical data referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least the following:	2. The statistical data referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least the following:
(a) the number of environmental crime cases reported;	(a) the number of environmental crime cases reported;
(b) the number of environmental crime cases investigated;	(b) the number of environmental crime cases investigated;
(c) the average length of the criminal investigations of environmental crimes;	(c) the average length of court proceedings from the beginning of the criminal investigations of environmental crimes to the issuance of the judicial sentence and its execution;
(d) the number of convictions for environmental crime;	(d) the number of convictions for environmental crime;
(e) the number of natural persons convicted and sanctioned for environmental crime;	(e) the number of natural persons convicted and sanctioned for environmental crime;
(f) the number of legal persons sanctioned for environmental crime or equivalent offences;	(f) the number of legal persons sanctioned for environmental crime or equivalent offences and whether the perpetrator was an organised crime group or acted within such a group;
(g) the number of dismissed court cases for environmental crime;	(g) the number of dismissed court cases for environmental crime;
(h) the types and levels of sanctions imposed for environmental crime, including per categories of environmental offences according to Article 3.	(h) the types and levels of sanctions imposed for environmental crime, including per categories of environmental offences according to Article 3;
	(ha) the number of transnational environmental crime cases disaggregated by countries where the environmental offence was committed;
	(hb) figures on proceeds from environmental crimes that were provisionally seized or frozen and finally confiscated;
	(hc) information on whether the environmental crime constitutes a predicate offence for money laundering;
	(hd) the number of victims, including groups of victims or local communities, disaggregated, inter alia, by sex, age, ethnicity, country of origin;
	(he) type of impact on the environment and on people and local communities.