MECHANISMS FOR PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT DURING ARMED CONFLICTS IN INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW AND ISSUES OF THEIR IMPLEMENTATION INTO THE NATIONAL LEGISLATION OF UZBEKISTAN
##doi.readerDisplayName##:
https://doi.org/10.68023/byrq4c72Kalit so‘zlar:
International humanitarian law, ecocide, Rome Statute, ENMOD, Geneva Convention, transboundary damage, Criminal Code, Defense Doctrine, International Court of Justice, cyber-evidence.Abstrak
This article comprehensively examines the modern international legal mechanisms for protecting the environment during armed conflicts, the issues of states' international legal responsibility for transboundary environmental damage, and the problems of implementing these norms into the national criminal legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan, based on authentic international treaties and judicial practice. Within the scope of the study, a comparative legal analysis was conducted of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the 1976 UN ENMOD Convention, the 1998 Rome Statute, and the ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. Using the drainage of the Mesopotamian Marshlands and the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam as historical examples, the international-scale urgency of transboundary ecocide is highlighted.
The legal contradictions arising in practice from the "proportionality" criterion under Article 8(2)(b)(iv) of the Rome Statute, along with ways to improve it, are thoroughly substantiated. Article 152 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan ("Violation of the Laws and Customs of War") is analyzed, revealing the absence of an independent "ecocide" element and a systemic legal gap, and, drawing on the experience of CIS states — Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Ukraine — practical and scholarly proposals for harmonizing national legislation with international standards are developed and summarized in the final conclusions
References
1. Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (ProtocolI): 8 June 1977
(Acceded by the Resolution of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. 946-XII of September 3, 1993) // Lex.uz online legislative database.
2. Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) // UN General Assembly Resolution, 1976. Article 1, Part 1.
3. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court // Collection of International Legal Documents of the UN, 1998. Article 8(2)(b)(iv), p.
4. UN Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment // Materials of the UN
Conference, 1972. Principle 21.
5. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons // International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, Paragraph 31.
6. UNEP Report. (2001). The Mesopotamian Marshlands: Demise of an Ecosystem. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Division of Early Warning and Assessment. P. Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia) // ICJ Reports, 1997.
7. Tignino, M., Kebebew, T., & Pellaton, C. (2023). International Law and
Accountability for the Nova Kakhovka Dam Disaster. Lieber Institute for Law & Warfare, West Point. Online digital repository.
8. Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan // Bulletin of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 1995, No. 1 (current version based on lex.uz data).
9. Hemptinne, J. de. (2022). Ecocide: An Ambiguous Crime?. EJIL: Talk!, Blog of the European Journal of International Law.
10. Rekrut, I. (2025, March 20). Environmental destruction in conflict: broadening accountability in war.
