Criminal Liability for Environmental Damage – National Courts versus the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea

This article argues to abolish Criminal Liability for Environmental Damage in order to
consider legislative amendments, which comply with the rulings of ITLOS. There is a
discrepancy between plaintiffs who are able to present their cases to ITLOS and those
who are unable to do so. In most fishery cases, plaintiffs are unable to resort to ITLOS
and national courts deal with these cases based on their own understanding, not that of
ITLOS. The article differentiates between Criminal Liability for Environmental Damage
(RLED) and Civil Liability for Environmental Damage (CLED). It also provides
examples and explanations for the difference between them. This article is divided into
four main sections. The first tackles the theoretical difference between CLED and RLED.
The second section presents six cases in which the ITLOS has dealt with the question of
national RLED. The cases show how ITLOS transforms RLED to CLED. The third
section highlights discrepancies in the practice of both international and national courts
with regard to two issues: confiscation and bond determination in fishery cases. The
fourth and last part recommends a solution to overcome discrepancies between national
and international courts.