Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

AddedSHORT JUSTIFICATION

AddedAccording 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.

AddedThe 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.

AddedThe 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.

AddedFirst 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.

AddedIn 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.

AddedThe 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.

AddedThe 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.

AddedThe 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.

AddedThere 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.

AddedTo 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.

AddedTo 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.

AddedAMENDMENTS

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

AddedRecitals 1 a (new)

AddedAmendment: (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.

AddedRecital 1 b (new): (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.

AddedRecital 1 c (new): (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.

AddedRecital 1 d (new): (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.

AddedRecital 2: (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 Sustain…

AddedRecital 3: (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.

AddedRecital 3 a (new): (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.

AddedDespite 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.

AddedRecitals 6

AddedAmendment: (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.

AddedRecital 6 a (new): (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).

AddedRecital 8: (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.

AddedRecital 11 a (new): (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.

AddedRecital 12: (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 ex…

AddedRecital 14: (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.

AddedRecital 14 a (new): (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.

AddedRecital 15: (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.

AddedRecital 16: (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.

AddedRecital 16 a (new): (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

AddedOn 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.

AddedRecital 19: (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.

AddedRecital 20: (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.

AddedRecital 23: (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.

AddedRecital 24 a (new): (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.

AddedRecital 24 b (new): (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.

AddedRecital 31 a (new): (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.

AddedRecital 31 b (new): (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.

AddedRecital 32: (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 res…

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1: 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.

AddedArticle 2: 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…

AddedArticle 3: -1. Member States shall ensure that, when committed intentionally or with at least serious negligence, directly or indirectly exposing the environment to an immediate risk of substantial damage constitutes a criminal offence. / -1a. Member States shall ensure that conduct which knowingly causes substantial damage to the environment constitutes a criminal offence. / 1. Member States shall ensure that the following conduct constitutes a criminal offence when it is unlawful and committed intentionally, or with serious negligence: / (a) the discharge, emission or introduction of a quantity of materials or substances or ionising radiation into air, soil or water which causes or is likely to cause death or serious injury to any natural person, group of persons, community or economic loss, including for legal persons, or substantial damage to the quality of air, the quality of soil or the quality of water, or to animals or plants; / (b) the placing on the market of a product which, in breach of a prohibition or another requirement, causes or is likely to cause death or serious injury to any person or substantial damage to air, water or soil quality, or to biodiversity, ecosystems and their functions, animals or plants as a result of the product's use on a larger scale; / (c) the manufacture, placing on the market, export from the Union market or use of substances, whether on their own, in mixtures or in articles, including their incorporation into articles, when: / (vi a) that activ…

AddedArticle 3 a (new): 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.

AddedArticle 4: 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), (-1a) and (1) or Article 3a when committed intentionally is punishable as a criminal offence.

AddedArticle 5 – paragraph 1: 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.

AddedArticle 5 – paragraph 2: 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.

AddedArticle 5 – paragraph 5: 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: / (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 and licences; / (ea) bans on the pursuit of activities which have resulted in committing the offence;

AddedArticle 6 – paragraph 2: 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.

AddedArticle 6 – paragraph 3: 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.

AddedArticle 7: (b) the obligation to reinstate the environment within a given period and to compensate for the damage caused; / (d) temporary exclusion from access to public funding, including tender procedures, grants and concessions and licenses; / (j) obligation of companies to install due diligence schemes for enhancing compliance with environmental and human rights standards and obligations; / (k) publication of the judicial decision relating to the conviction or any sanctions or measures applied; / (ka) community services in favour of the environment; / (kb) financial contributions to environmental or human rights organisations, especially in developing countries; / (kc) presenting apologies to and making requests for forgiveness from the affected victims; / (kd) attribution of shares or social capital to the victims in the developing countries. / 4. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that offences referred to in Article 3(-1), (-1a) and (1) are punishable by fines, the maximum limit of which shall be not less than 15% of the total worldwide turnover of the legal person [/undertaking] in the business year preceding the fining decision. / (deleted) / 6a. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that offences referred to in Article 3a are punishable by fines, paid by the legal person committing the environmental offence, the minimum amount of which shall be between 15 and 30 % of the total worldwide turnover of the legal person in the business yea…

AddedArticle 8: (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; / (ba) the offence damaged a legally protected area in a third country; / (d) the offence involved the use of false or forged documents or serious violation of Directive (EU) xxx/xxx [Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive]; / (ea) the offender holds a political position or has been entrusted with prominent public functions; / (fa) the offence was committed together with other crimes; / (h) the offender's conduct gives rise to liability for environmental damage but the offender does not fulfil their obligat…

AddedArticle 9 – paragraph 1 – point a: (a) the offender restores nature to its previous condition or pays fair compensation to the victims;

AddedArticle 9 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new): (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;

AddedIt 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.

AddedArticle 10 – paragraph 1 a (new): 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.

AddedAs 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.