Green Transition:

La transition écologique :
Part 1

Source : https://www.wordclouds.com/

INSP 2022

Victor POPP

1 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

 Table of contents
Overview………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………...page 2

Exercise 1: Oral exchange…………………..………………………………………………………………..pages 2-3

Exercise 2: Verb + preposition : language work……………………………………………….…..page 3

Exercise 3: Describing a trend………adding transitional phrases………………….………….page 4

Exercise 4: Writing and describing a trend …………………………………………………….……pages 4-5

Exercise 5: A line debate……………………………………………………………………………………..pages 5-6

Reading : Four texts related to ‘Ecocide’ …………………………………………………………….pages 6-15

Word-bank: References: Vocabulary development…………………………………………………pages16-17

Part A : Green Transition : La transition écologique

Overview : The aim of this lesson is to consolidate and expand students’ general understanding
of the topic by building topical vocabulary, developing students’ confidence in expressing their
ideas both orally and written.

Exercises are designed to be carried out in larger or smaller groups as well as for self-study.
Additionally, exercises are planned to reflect on the exam format or tools to develop one’s
English language competencies.

Students should spend time reviewing the ‘Word-bank’’and topical wordlists and links on pages
16-17.

Exercise 1: Warm up: Oral exchange

Generally Speaking…

Oral expression: As a group or with a partner. (Spend about 15-20 minutes on this
exchange)Develop your responses, engage, justify and convince.

1. Describe the changes in the energy mix of your country which have taken place over the past
few decades.
2. Name as many sorts of renewable energy that you can in 30 seconds.
3. Is the worst of climate change behind us? Why? Why not?
4. What is the best methodology to measure a country’s carbon footprint?
5. Which country is the bellwether in green transition?
6. Can you make a link between an experience in an internship and ecological transition?
7. Which environmental program or policy, EU wide, has had the most success against climate
change?
8. What are the arguments given by countries which are slow to embrace green transition?

2 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

 9. Is the argument that “energy transition means the creation of quality green jobs”
irrefutable?
10. How has green transition impacted equality between the haves and the have-nots?

Exercise 2 : Enhance your accuracy. Verbs + preposition

Match these verbs to a preposition.

- Verbs : listen/ explain / equip / transition / prevent / depart / attribute / argue / participate
/exclude / refer / associate /provide / convince / react / account / benefit / call / couple /
/ dispose/consent/
Prepositions
-for from of in to with
listen

Expand: Complete the phrases following using an appropriate combination of verb+ preposition in
the correct form.
Example: Business leaders should have listened to the scientific community decades ago.

1. Climate change activists need to _____________ world leaders that inaction is not an option.

2. Governments must be ___________ the need for drastic action to combat climate change.

3. Respiratory illness caused by the burning of fossil fuel ________________ 25% of all deaths in
developing countries.

4. Transition to renewable energy, _______________ desalinisation of sea water, will ensure an

adequate supply of fresh water for future generations.

5. We should all be ______________ waste in a responsible, environmentally friendly manner.

6. Future generations will __________________unpopular political decisions taken today.

7. Tree-huggers are _________________ a total ban on the use of fossil fuels.

8. The challenges of ________________ a circular economy are not insurmountable.

9. The ___________ nations boycotting the COP 26 speak volumes about the enormous hurdles to
energy transition.
10. In the long run, studies show that it is more cost-effective to _______________ energy transition
schemes.

11. The developed world has yet to _____________________ huge financial aid programs for developing
nations.

12. People most commonly _____________ rising sea levels ____________ global warming

13. Simply put, the world is not _____________ the consequences of inaction on climate change.

14. Over one-third of respondents to a nationwide survey stated that financial costs ____________ them
______ upgrading their homes to a more energy efficient level.
15. At the last summit lobbyists, for the big business, __________ more relaxed climate regulation which
would stimulate economic growth.

3 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

Exercise 3: Focus on speaking /writing : Describing trends

Match the phrases to the lines.

Phrases Trends

-a sharp decrease

- a spike in renewable research

-a steady increase

- a slight rise

- to drop sharply

-to fluctuate

-to remain steady

- to decline rapidly

-What are some other phrases to describe trends?

Next…Combine trends with transitional phrases.

Transitional phrases:

-coupled with/ run parallel to / consequently / lead to/ resulted in / conversely / to the
contrary/exclusive of / for the most part / illustrated/ in essence / in turn / on balance

Examples:

A. Steady reductions in the costs of solar panels, wind turbines, and other renewable energy devices
worldwide coupled with government incentives are making renewables more easily accessible to the
private sector every year. These changes have resulted in a steady increase of quality green jobs
which in turn lift the standard of living in developing countries.(55 words)

B. A spike in advances in Artificial Intelligence (A.I.)make it increasingly possible to gain actionable

knowledge from big data in the transition to renewable energy. Running parallel to those advances are
policies in the public and private sectors which continually incentivise the ongoing reduction of
harmful emissions.(47 words)

Exercise 4 : Focus on writing and speaking:

 Visit this link on “Charts of Fossil fuels” : https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels

Scroll down to “All our charts on Fossil Fuels” and open it.

 Select a Chart on Fossil fuels . Write a trend relating to the chart. Describe the trend then
speculate on why it is /was/ has been happening or why it happened. Highlight the trend
words and the transitional phrases.

4 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

  Read your trend aloud to the group or a partner then invite questions .

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

Source: Our World in Data: https://ourworldindata.org/

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Exercise 5 : A line debate. To prepare for this line debate students should read the texts on
pages 6-15 and watch the video below, as a self-study project.

VIDEO: Source: DW News Ecocide explained: How activists want to hold those destroying the
environment accountable. 27 June 2021

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiBMiRswVzA&ab_channel=DWNews

The motions for this debate will centre around the proposed ‘Ecocide’ law.

Motion 1. This house believes widespread destruction of the environment should be an international
crime.
Or…
Motion 2. This house believes that paying fines or compensation for damaging the environment is enough
of a deterrent.

Line debate protocols.

Students select two teams and a chairperson. NB: There could be more than 6 participants- just follow
the pattern below.
The teams will be given 15 minutes, in class, to discuss their –individual- arguments.
OPPOSITION PROPOSITION
(persuades NOT to support motion) (persuades to support motion)

th th nd st rd th
6 4 speaker 2 speaker 1 speaker 3 speaker 5
Summarise. Summarise.
speaker speaker
2 mins 2 mins 2 mins 2 mins 2 mins 2 mins

Chairperson
* Starts the debate, “Welcome, we are here to debate the motion, “This House believes…………..”
* Then directs operations, invites speakers in turn to deliver speeches, maintains order, keeps time
and organises the final vote.

5 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

Participants: To challenge, use meaningless but influential phrases.

-That is an excellent point and one that needs to be addressed….

-My distinguished colleague is sadly misinformed….
-A compelling argument, however, …
-The speaker does not understand the urgency of the motion, let me put it this way…
- In terms of….what do you mean?
-The honorable member makes a fair point but which begs the question…?
-A wordy but unconvincing monologue, are you saying…..?

Other?...

______________________________________________________

Four texts to read for self-study related to the line debate. Ecocide

TEXT 1:

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

How 165 Words Could Make Mass Environmental Destruction An International Crime

Source : NPR : National Public Radio

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/27/1010402568/ecocide-environment-destruction-international-
crime-criminal-court?t=1639389596678

Written by : Josie Fischels : 27 June 2021

Mass environmental destruction, known as ecocide, would become an international crime

similar to genocide and war crimes under a proposed new legal definition.

The definition's unveiling last week by a panel of 12 lawyers from around the world marks a
big first step in the global campaign's efforts to prevent future environmental disasters like
the deforestation of the Amazon or actions that contribute to climate change.
There are currently four core international crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against
humanity, and the crime of aggression. These crimes are dealt with by the Rome Statute of
the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide spent six months preparing
the 165-word definition, working with outside experts along the way. In a draft of the
definition by the Stop Ecocide Foundation, a Netherlands-based coalition, panelists said they
hoped the proposed definition could provide a basis for the consideration of a new
international crime.

6 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

So, what's the proposed definition?
The draft defines ecocide as "unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is
a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the
environment being caused by those acts."

Unlike the existing four international crimes, ecocide would be the only crime in which
human harm is not a prerequisite for prosecution.

"There are elements of human harm that can be included in (the definition), but it also
extends to damage, per se, to ecosystems," said Jojo Mehta, chair and co-founder of the Stop
Ecocide Foundation. "So effectively you're looking at something that has, at least in part,
potential to be a crime against nature, not just a crime against people."

The original ecocide proposal is almost 50 years old

The intent to make ecocide an international crime isn't new. The idea was brought up by
then-Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme at the 1972 U.N. Conference on the Human
Environment. In his speech, he warned that rapid industrial progress could deplete natural
resources at unsustainable levels. But even before that biologist and bioethicist Arthur
Galston used the word "ecocide" at the 1970 Conference on War and National Responsibility
in Washington, D.C.
A Crime With No Name: The International Definition Of 'Ecocide'

Several other attempts at formalizing ecocide as an international crime have emerged since
then. Ecocide was considered and then dropped during the formal establishment of the ICC
in 1998. For 10 years until her death in 2019, Scottish barrister Polly Higgins campaigned for
ecocide to be recognized as a crime against humanity. The Stop Ecocide Foundation took up
the challenge in 2017.

7 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

 A proposed definition is just the start of a long process
What would it take for the ICC to adopt the ecocide definition and amend the Rome Statute?
A lot. Here are the steps that would need to happen:

1. One of the International Criminal Court's 123-member countries (which do not include the
U.S., China or India) would have to submit a definition to the United Nations secretary-general

2. The proposal must then be voted on by a majority of members of the ICC at the annual
assembly in December in order to be considered.

3. Once the final text for an amendment is discussed and agreed upon, two-thirds of member
countries must vote in favor.

4. The vote is ratified and must be enforced in countries a year later. While it will become a
criminal offense in the countries where it is ratified, ratifying nations may arrest non-nationals on their
own soil for ecocide crimes committed elsewhere. This means citizens of countries that are not
members of the ICC could still be affected.

Between the formal proposal of an ecocide crime by a member country and ratification,
however, an amendment process could take years to decades. The court would hold a vote at
their annual meeting in December to take up the proposal, and after that, debates would
begin to finalize the crime's definition.

Despite this, Mehta says that rapidly growing conversations and support around the subject
have given the panel confidence.

"We don't see any likelihood of it disappearing. The likelihood is it will actually get
proposed," she said. "However, even if it takes longer than we would like ... just the fact that
this conversation is happening is already making a difference."

The International Crime Court has not yet commented on the panel's proposal.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _

TEXT 2
Lawyers Are Working to Put 'Ecocide' on Par with War Crimes. Could an
International Law Hold Major Polluters to Account?

Source : Time magazine: https://time.com/5940759/ecocide-law-

environment-destruction-icc/

BY MÉLISSA GODIN 19 FEBRUARY 2021

When a Nigerian judge ruled in 2005 that Shell’s practice of gas flaring in the Niger Delta
was a violation of citizens’ constitutional rights to life and dignity, Nnimmo Bassey, a local
environmental activist, was thrilled.
Bassey’s organization, Friends of the Earth, had helped communities in the Niger Delta sue
Shell for gas flaring, a highly polluting practice that caused mass disruption to communities in
the region, polluting water and crops. Researchers had found that those disruptions were
associated with increased rates of cancer, blood disorders, skin diseases, acid rain, and birth
defects—leading to a life expectancy of 41 in the region, 13 years fewer than the national
average.

8 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

“For the first time, a court of competence has boldly declared that Shell, Chevron and the
other oil corporations have been engaged in illegal activities here for decades,”
Bassey said on Nov. 14, 2005, the day the Federal High Court of Nigeria announced the
ruling. “We expect this judgement to be respected and that for once the oil corporations will
accept the truth and bring their sinful flaring activities to a halt.”
Yet the judgement was not respected. A United Nations report published six years later found
that Shell had not followed its own procedures regarding the maintenance of oilfield
infrastructure. Today, Shell is still gas flaring in the Niger Delta.
In the 15 years since the ruling, Bassey has come to believe that Shell’s executives might
have been held accountable had the case gone to the International Criminal Court (ICC).
“Shell could ignore [the case] because it wasn’t in the international media but if it had gone to
the ICC, it would have gotten global attention and shareholders would have known what the
company was doing,” he says. “If we had had an ecocide law, things would have turned out
differently.”
The word “ecocide” is an umbrella term for all forms of environmental destruction from
deforestation to greenhouse gas emissions. Since the 1970s, environmental advocates have
championed the idea of creating an international ecocide law that would be adjudicated in the
ICC and would penalize individuals responsible for environmental destruction. But the effort
has gained significant traction over the past year, with leaders from Vanuatu, the Maldives,
France, Belgium, the Netherlands—as well as influential global figures like Pope Francis and
Greta Thunberg—expressing their support. Although there are questions about whether the
ICC as an institution has the teeth to prosecute any crimes, Bassey and other activists believe
the law will act as a powerful deterrent against future forms of environmental destruction.
“We will not get different outcomes in cases of exploitation and marginalization unless we
reimagine the laws that govern us,” Bassey says.
In December 2020, lawyers from around the world gathered to begin drafting a legal
definition of ecocide. If they succeed, it would potentially situate environmental destruction
in the same legal category as war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. But even
within the movement, questions remain on how far the law should go — and who might fall
under its jurisdiction.
The history of the ecocide movement
The term ecocide first rose to the public consciousness in 1972, when Olof Palme, the premier
of Sweden, used the term at a United Nations environmental confere nce in Stockholm to
describe the environmental damage caused by the Vietnam War. At the conference, an ecocide
convention was proposed but never came to pass.
The idea resurfaced again in the 1990s when the ICC, the world’s first permanent
international criminal court, was being created. As a court of last resort, the ICC was
established not to override national courts but to complement them, creating a global tribunal
that would adjudicate the gravest crimes of concern to the international community. When
lawyers came together in 1998 to draft the Rome Statute, the founding document of the ICC,
there was a law in the pipeline that would have criminalized environmental destruction.
But the law never came about. “My recollection is that there was just no poli tical support for
it,” says Philippe Sands, who was involved in drafting the preamble of the Rome Statute in
1998 (and who would go on to co-chair the expert panel formed in 2020 to draft a legal
definition of ecocide). Environmental destruction, Sands says, was not on the public’s
consciousness.
This began to change in 2017 when Polly Higgins, a British barrister, launched the Stop
Ecocide campaign alongside environmental activist Jojo Mehta. Higgins, who sold her home
in 2010 to raise funds to combat environmental destruction, wrote an influential
book, Eradicating Ecocide, that informed the legal debate. When the campaign launched a
few years later, it quickly gained unprecedented momentum: Greta Thunberg donated
€100,000 of the money she received from that year’s Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity to the
cause, and for the first time in history, several world leaders publicly backed the idea. Fast -
forward three years and now, an expert panel of international criminal lawyers is drafting a
definition of ecocide. “Six months ago, we never would have believed where we are at now,”

9 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

says Mehta. Higgins, sadly, never lived to see her campaign bear fruit, dying in 2019 at th e
age of 50.
Environmental advocates believe an ecocide law at the ICC would be groundbreaking. While
some countries have national laws on environmental harm, there is no international c riminal
law that explicitly imposes penalties on individuals responsible for environmental destruction.
If adopted, experts say there are three main areas where an ecocide law would make a
difference.
The first is the symbolic impact of having the ICC elevate environmental destruction to the
same level as genocidal crimes. Mehta argues that the fear of being labelled an ecocide
criminal could create incentives for leaders to behave more responsibly. “A CEO doesn’t want
to be seen in the same bracket as a genocidal maniac,” she says.
The second area where this law could make a difference is by setting a legal precedent,
creating a bandwagon effect where international law could prompt changes in national
criminal laws, as countries look to signal their environmental commitment to others. ICC laws
have influenced national policies before: several countries, including Germany and the
Netherlands, have adopted national laws that criminalize ICC crimes.
The third way an ecocide law could be useful is by prosecuting environmental crimes that fall
outside of national jurisdictions. This is especially helpful in poorer countries where legal
barriers make it difficult to hold foreign companies accountable. An ecocide law, Bassey says,
would create an arena in which marginalized communities in countries like Nigeria have a
voice against powerful, polluting actors. “Most of this ecocide devastation is happening in
communities where voices are not heard,” he says.
Advocates of an ecocide law also believe it would change the way the environment is valued.
“There is something powerfully urgent about the idea that nature has rights,” says Mitch
Anderson, founder and executive director of Amazon Frontlines, an organization that works
with Indigenous communities in the Western Amazon to protect their lands. “The [ecocide]
law would ensure that nature has a legal voice.”
There’s still a long way to go, though. While lawyers are expected to finish a d raft of the law
by the end of spring, it will take at least 3 to 5 years before the law might be ratified. Drafting
the law is just the first of many steps: a member state needs to propose it to the ICC, at which
point, 50% of ICC states have to approve it. States will then need to convene to debate the
exact definition of the law before eventually, adopting and ratifying it.
But if passed, an ecocide law would be unique in the ICC’s history, not only because of what
it would protect but who it could go after—the heads of countries and corporations that are
big polluters. Historically, the ICC has been criticized for targeting only African
dictators while turning a blind eye to Western leaders responsible for mass atrocities. But with
an ecocide law, powerful white men—who are often disproportionately represented in
extractive industries—could face criminal charges. “The ecocide movement is powerful not
only in the legal precedent it could set for protecting rivers, forests, oceans and the air but
also in the names and faces it identifies as being behind this destruction,” says Anderson.
“[They] may not look like the picture we’re used to seeing.”
Oil and gas companies contacted by TIME did not want to comment on whether they support
an ecocide law, but the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP) said in a
statement they “want to further improve the environmental performance and reduce the
likelihood and consequences of incident.”
What counts as ecocide?
Bassey is confident that many of the world’s worst environmental offenses —such as
Chevron’s pollution of the Ecuadorian Amazon in the 1990s or the ongoing coal-seam fires in
Witbank, South Africa—could have been prevented had an ecocide law been in place. “If we
had an ecocide law, no one would allow this to go on,” he says. In theory, that might be true.
But in practice, much depends on how the term is defined.
Sands, the co-chair of the panel drafting the law, is concerned that the bar for what counts as
“ecocide” could be set too high. There’s historical precedence for such a scenario: When the
idea of “genocide” was first proposed in 1944 by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish lawyer, he
envisioned a law that would prosecute individuals that killed members of a national, ethnic,

10 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

racial, religious or political group. But when member states—many of whom who were
worried about their own histories of discrimination—came together to actually draft the law in
1948, they decided that lawyers needed to prove not only that an individual killed members of
a group but that they did so with the specific intention to kill.
The result is that most genocide trials heard by the ICC have not ended with a guilty verdict
because the burden of proof is too high. Sands is worried the same mistake might be made
with the definition of ecocide. “It will never be possible to prove that someone intended to
destroy the environment on a massive scale,” he says. “If we set the bar too high, we won’t
catch anyone.”
On the other hand, if the bar is set too low—if the ecocide law encompasses too many types of
alleged environmentally destructive acts, and implicates too many types of people and
institutions—it may lose political support. Many people might get behind an ecocide law that
charges mega-corporations for polluting on a grand scale; it is less likely they would support a
law that penalizes anyone who destroys the environment in any way. The lawyers drafting the
definition didn’t want to offer their opinion on what, specifically, a “low bar” would look like
out of concern that doing so would put at risk their ability to advocate for a more robust law.
But even if a robust ecocide law is put in place, the movement faces another big challenge:
the limited legal powers of the ICC. On its own, the ICC does not have the authority to
enforce laws; it is completely reliant on its member states to arrest and surrender the accused.
If a country does not comply—if it does not arrest the accused individual—there is no trial. In
addition, over 70 countries are not members—including the United States. Some of the
biggest fossil fuel corporations, such as Exxon Mobil and Chevron, are American owned,
meaning they would be unlikely to be drawn into a prosecution.
Lawyers working on the ecocide law are acutely aware of these limitations. “Let’s not be
starry eyed about our legal international frameworks at the international level,” Sands says.
“Let’s be realistic.” Holding perpetrators of environmental destruction to account, he says,
must ultimately be done at the national level. Nevertheless, international criminal law can be
a tool that catalyzes thinking and helps set a precedent. Although only four people have been
convicted at the ICC since it began hearing cases in 2002, the creation of ICC law
has influenced national policy through the norms and precedents it helped to generate.
Advocates of ecocide believe the law could do something similar.
“We know one law won’t change everything,” says Mehta. “But without something like this in
place, it’s hard to see how these [environmental] targets will be met.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Text 3

Indigenous Leaders and Human Rights Groups in Brazil Want Bolsonaro Prosecuted for Crimes
Against Humanity : Adapted

Source : Inside Climate news : https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24062021/bolsonaro-amazon-

brazil-deforestaiton-climate-change-indigenous-rights-ecocide/

Written by Katie Surma 24 June 2021

11 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

The Brazilian leader’s “state policy” to deforest and “plunder” the Amazon, they’ve told the
International Criminal Court, threatens tribal communities and constitutes what should be a new
crime, “ecocide.”
On a Tuesday afternoon in late March 2020, Zezico Rodrigues Guajajara was killed by gunmen as he
was driving a motorbike near his home village on the Araribóia reservation in Maranhao, Brazil.
A member of the Guajajara tribe, he had worked for years to protect land in the Amazon belonging
to his ancestors and other uncontacted, or isolated, tribes. For Zezico, fending off illegal incursions
had become increasingly dangerous as emboldened logging and mining groups targeted him and
other Indigenous environmental activists. He was the fifth Guajajara to be killed in a five-month
period.
Indigenous chiefs and human rights organizations have linked such killings to a “state policy”
implemented by Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro to “plunder the wealth of the Amazon,” and asked
the International Criminal Court to open an investigation into whether the actions of the far-right
leader and other top Brazilian officials constitute crimes against humanity.
Some court watchers say the requests are a legal “hail mary,” given that the international court
doesn’t have jurisdiction over peace-time environmental destruction and that national governments
have long had control over natural resources within their own borders.
But Bolsonaro’s rampant deforestation of the Amazon and the threat posed by climate change have
prompted world leaders like Pope Francis and French President Emmanuel Macron to support a
campaign for a new international crime called “ecocide” that would outlaw widespread
environmental destruction. Supporters cite Bolsonaro’s actions in the Amazon as a prime example of
ecocide happening in real-time.
For now, the court’s jurisdiction is limited to genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the
crime of aggression. But in 2016 the court’s Office of the Prosecutor expressed a willingness to give
“particular” consideration to crimes related to environmental destruction, illegal exploitation of
natural resources or the illegal dispossession of land.
Some legal analysts think Karim Asad Ahmad Khan, the court’s new prosecutor as of June 16, may for
the first time authorize an investigation related to environmental destruction because Bolsonaro’s
alleged crimes against humanity—murders and the forced displacement of Indigenous groups—are
so closely related to the Amazon’s deforestation.
Whatever Khan decides, the Bolsonaro case presents the international court with a novel way to
advance legal thinking about peace-time environmental destruction and how deforestation can be
linked to the commission of crimes against humanity, defined legally as widespread or systematic
attacks against a civilian population, with knowledge of the attacks. Environmental destruction
during times of conflict is already considered a war crime that falls within the jurisdiction of the
court, which has historically focused on crimes associated with armed conflict.
In January, two Brazilian Indigenous chiefs, Almir Narayamoga Suruí and Raoni Metuktire, filed what
is known as an Article 15 Communication, essentially an informative legal document requesting that
the prosecutor open an investigation. The request detailed Bolsonaro’s environmental and
Indigenous policies, ecological harms, and accounts of murder, forced displacement and persecution
carried out against Brazil’s Indigenous population. They argued in the 68-page document that further
destruction of the Amazon, 60 percent of which is in Brazil, also poses a threat to humankind.
“The Amazon rainforest plays an essential role in global climate regulation. A point of no return must
be avoided at all costs,” the chiefs said in a statement attached to their request. Scientists have
warned that a tipping point, where the rainforest can no longer regenerate itself, may be near, and

12 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

that the collapse of the Amazon would cause cascading environmental disasters. Suruí is from Sete
de Setembro Indigenous land and Metuktire is from the Xingu Indigenous Reserve, both located in
the rainforest.
“What is happening is ecocide,” said French lawyer Valérie Cabanes, who helped prepare Suruí and
Metuktire’s request and serves on a panel of international lawyers that released a legal definition of
“ecocide” on Tuesday as part of a campaign to criminalize “severe” and “widespread or long-term”
environmental damage.
Cabanes said Surui and Metuktire “filed the case alleging crimes against humanity because that’s
what’s available right now, and the crimes that are happening fit that definition, too.”
Bolsonaro has a history of making anti-Indigenous statements. He has compared isolated Indigenous
peoples to animals in a zoo, and in 2020 said that “Indians are undoubtedly changing …They are
increasingly becoming human beings just like us.” In 1998, he lamented that Brazil wasn’t as
“efficient” as the United States, which “exterminated the Indians.” And as president, his
administration opened investigations into Indigenous leaders, including Suruí, who have spoken out
against his policies, accusing them of defaming the President.
Over the past 40 years, Indigenous groups have won hard-fought legal gains in Brazil and
internationally. At the same time, the fields of international criminal and human rights law have
developed, piercing the previously unassailable shield of state sovereignty and culminating in the
1998 creation of the International Criminal Court.
In possibly taking on environmental destruction, some question if the court is being asked to do too
much. Critics say the institution has underperformed and is already overextended.
As the prosecutor considers the requests to investigate Bolsonaro, the campaign to make ecocide an
international crime is gaining momentum. Supporters of the campaign hope one of the court’s 123
member countries will trigger a formal process to amend the court’s founding treaty, known as the
Rome Statute, by formally requesting that ecocide be added as the court’s fifth crime.
The panel’s release on Tuesday of the legal definition, after six months’ work, was seen as an
important precursor to such a request from a member nation. The panel defined ecocide as
“unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe
and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts.”
The process for considering, debating and ultimately approving ecocide as an international crime
could take years. And even if successful would ultimately require the agreement of two-thirds of the
court’s member countries. In the meantime, the only way the court can hold Bolsonaro accountable
is if he has committed acts that fall within one of the court’s four existing crimes. The two requests
allege that he has.
Still, Suruí and Metuktire argue that their request advances the case for the “recognition of ecocide”
as an international crime. For them and others, the scale and urgency of the climate crisis, along with
the lack of alternative mechanisms to stop the depletion of the Amazon, make the International
Criminal Court their last and best hope.
“The prosecution of [Bolsonaro] in Brazil is blocked. The only person who can investigate him is the
[Brazilian] Chief Prosecutor of Justice, who is an ally of Bolsonaro,” said Ana Carolina Alfinito, a legal
advisor with the non-profit Amazon Watch. “We’ll never have true justice for his crimes if the
International Criminal Court doesn’t act.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

13 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

Text 4

Source : https://luca-dannetta.medium.com/

The effects of tar sands development on Alberta’s Indigenous peoples: a case of ecocide

https://luca-dannetta.medium.com/the-effects-of-tar-sands-development-on-albertas-indigenous-
peoples-a-case-of-ecocide-be17796a8368

Author : Luca Dannetta ; 27 October ,2020 Extract

Northern Alberta is home to the second largest known deposit of bitumen in the world.
Locked in the tar sands of the Athabasca region, this deposit has become the economic engine
of the province. Over the past half-century, the tar sands have witnessed a dramatic expansion
of production, growing from an output of 50,000 barrels of oil per day in 1976 to 2.5 million
barrels per day in 2014. But this explosion of production has resulted in mass ecological
devastation, irreparably altering the landscape of the Athabasca delta and watershed. Tar
sands development has resulted in mass deforestation, open-pit mining, depletion of water
systems, toxic contamination, and destruction of biodiversity. A once lush boreal forest has
been replaced by a vast industrial wasteland visible from space, spotted with toxic tailings
lakes, and criss-crossed by bitumen pipelines. Yet, while the Alberta tar sands have become a
hot topic of debate in environmental management, scholars have noted a considerable gap in
the social science literature of studies which assess the impact of the extractive project on the
region’s Indigenous peoples. The region remains home to many Indigenous communities,
including Cree, Chipewyan, Prairie Dene and Metis nations, and the tar sands lie almost
entirely within their traditional territories. The ecological devastation inflicted by tar sands
development has had a crippling impact on the ability of Indigenous communities to practice
and maintain their traditional ways of life and their Treaty rights. The shrinking accessibility
to healthy land undermines subsistence lifestyles and threatens senses of place, language, and
knowledge. Furthermore, Indigenous communities living downstream of the tar sands
experience disproportionate rates of deadly diseases such as leukemia, lymphoma, and colon
cancer.
Coined in 1970 by American biologist Arthur Galston, the definition of ecocide has evolved
considerably as understandings of ecology and anthropology have evolved. The most
commonly accepted definition comes from the Scottish lawyer Polly Higgins, who defined the
term in a submission to the United Nations Law Commission proposing the establishment of
an international law of ecocide. Higgins defined ecocide as “extensive damage to, destruction
of or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to
such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been severely
diminished.” Ecocide can involve deliberate destruction of habitats, but it can also include
reckless behaviour, such as exploiting resources “without regard for the known or foreseeable
risk of destruction,” or negligent behaviour such as undertaking “inappropriate development
projects” or “improperly regulating development.” Higgins’ definition also recognized that
ecocide can lead to cultural destruction via the undermining of an ecological or cultural way of
life. Indeed, a number of scholars have demonstrated that ecocide can function as a method of
genocide in cases where environmental destruction “results in conditions of life that
fundamentally threaten a social group’s cultural and/or physical existence.” This assertion is
not a significant departure from the original conception of genocide. Raphael Lemkin, the
Polish legal scholar who coined the term of genocide in 1944, recognized the destruction of
culture as a key method of group destruction. Underpinning his theory was the “central
ontological assertion” that culture integrates human societies, and is a “necessary
precondition for the realization of individual material needs.” Processes associated with
ecological destruction, such as land dispossession, displacement, forced migration, and a spike
in environment-related diseases can disrupt the “cultural and material subsistence” of a
group, and therefore result in the destruction of its physical and cultural foundations as a

14 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

distinct people. It is therefore argued that if ecological destruction erodes the socioecological
relations which constitute the cultural and physical foundation of a particular group’s
existence, then ecological destruction can be understood as a method of group destruction,
and therefore a genocide. This insight provides not only a definition for ecocide, but an
applicable framework for how it can effect group destruction. Ecocide requires ecological
destruction on a mass scale resulting in a threat to the physical and/or cultural foundations of
a group’s existence. Using this definition and framework, this paper will now present the
evidence that the environmental externalities produced by the development of the Alberta tar
sands constitute an ecocide against the region’s Indigenous peoples.

In conclusion, the environmental externalities produced by tar sands development in northern

Alberta produce effects which meet the criteria of an ecocide against the region’s Indigenous
peoples. At each stage of development, tar sands extraction and processing executes ecological
devastation on a mass scale, particularly by clear-cutting habitats, diverting waterways, and
emitting toxic by-products into air, water, and soil. The long-term effects of these
environmental externalities pose an existential threat to the physical and cultural existence of
the region’s Indigenous peoples. Toxic emissions cause abnormal rates of deadly disease and
the destruction of habitats and the toxication of soil and water undermines their traditional
subsistence lifestyle. The degradation of the natural environment severs crucial socio-
ecological ties between the population and their land. Combined, these threats to the
Indigenous population’s physical and cultural existence may have genocidal effects in the
long-term. Other authors, recognizing the colonial framework underpinning relations between
the Canadian state and the Indigenous peoples of northern Alberta, have used the term
genocide to describe their situation. However, the term ecocide is a better classification for
two reasons. First, ecocide centers the crucial socio-ecological relationship of Indigenous
peoples to their land, and therefore recognizes how ecological destruction affects Indigenous
populations in a distinct way.
Second, ecocide recognizes the potentially devastating effects of ecological destruction on a
mass scale as being akin to group destruction. Genocide, whether by definition or by historical
connotation, implies and suggests intentional mass killing. This narrow conception leaves out
many crimes of group destruction. By adopting the framework of ecocide for tar sands
development, scholars can recognize ecological devastation as being a direct threat to a
cultural group’s existence and therefore genocidal in nature. Recognizing the effects of tar
sands development as ecocide also carries significant policy implications. Future industrial
resource extraction projects should be examined for their potentially ecocidal effects against
Indigenous peoples. Governments must be made to understand that the ecological devastation
produced by industrial resource extraction is distinctly violent to Indigenous populations. No
project whose environmental effects pose a fundamental threat to the physical and/or cultural
existence of a distinct cultural group should be allowed to proceed. The framing of tar sands
development in northern Alberta as ecocide can therefore provide a valuable case study,
example, and framework to understand the especially violent and devastating effects of
industrial resource extraction on Indigenous lands. If Canadian policy makers recognize these
realities, then the moral imperative to shut down tar sands development immediately and
permanently becomes inescapable.

15 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

Word-bank : Green Transition

Source : http://www.letempsdundessin.com/green-energy/renewable-energy-vocabulary-french/

Sources of Energy
Fossil fuels – énergies fossiles
Coal – le charbon
Oil – le pétrole
Natural gas – le gaz naturel
Nuclear – le nucléaire

Renewable energy – énergies renouvelables

Types of Renewable Energy
Hydraulic (water) – hydraulique
Hydroelectric dam – un barrage hydroélectrique
Wind turbines – les éoliennes
Solar panels – les panneaux solaires
Geothermal energy/geothermal – l’énergie géothermique/ la géothermie
Biomass – la biomasse

Useful Adjectives
Nuisible/nocif – harmful
Nocivité – noxiousness
Radioactif – radioactive
Déchets radioactif – radioactive waste
Propre – clean

Les phrases utile/ Useful Phrases

La nature a mis 250 millions d’années pour fabriquer le pétrole et nous sommes capables de l’épuiser en moins
de cent ans.
Nature took 250 million years to produce our petrol and we are capable of exhausting it in less than 100
years.

Utiliser les lumières, jouer sur l’ordinateur, regarder la télé, mettre le chauffage, prendre sa voiture, tous ces
gestes quotidiens consomment de l’énergie.
Using lights, playing on the computer, watching TV, using central heating, using your car, all of these
daily activities use up energy.

Aujourd’hui ces ressources connaissent une flambée des prix.

Recently these resources have seen a price hike.

…le fait de leur raréfaction et l’explosion de la demande mondiale, notamment des pays émergent comme la
Chine et l’Inde…
…the fact of their scarcity and the explosion in its global demand, notably in emerging countries like
China and India….

Le nucléaire produit une énergie très concentrée.

Nuclear power produces very concentrated energy.
L'énergie nucléaire ne libère pas de gaz polluants dans l'atmosphère.
Nuclear energy does not release polluting gases into the atmosphere.

Il faut tirer la sonnette d’alarme!

We must sound the alarm!

Source: https://www.frenchentree.com/living-in-france/learn-french/eco-homes-french-glossary/

Air source heating: pompe à chaleur air-air – converts hot air or steam above the ground into electricity . It is
also known as Aerothermic heating.
Biofuel: biocarburant – Biofuel is a fuel made from plant matter rather than fossil fuels, such as Ethanol and
biodiesel.
Biogas: biogaz – Biogas is produced from decomposing manure and other organic material. It can be used as a
fuel to produce electricity.
Biomass: biomasse– Biomass is plant material such as corn and other crops that can be converted into fuel.

16 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

Carbon credit: crédit-carbone– A carbon credit is a generic term meaning that a value has been assigned to a
reduction or offset of greenhouse gas emissions. There are also many companies that sell carbon credits to
commercial and individual customers who are interested in lowering their carbon footprint on a voluntary basis.
Carbon footprint: bilan carbone / empreinte carbone– A carbon footprint is “the total set of greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions caused by an organization, event or product”.
Carbon tax: taxe carbone – A tax proposed by the French government to be levied on all fuel products e.g.
petrol, gas, oil and white spirit.
Eco grant: eco-prime – Eco grants are sometimes awarded for ‘renewable energy’ systems such as solar hot
water systems, or for property heating and include log or pellet boilers, wood burning stoves and some heat
pumps.
Eco Prêt – Tax credits are also available with an interest free loan known as the “eco prêt” which is generally
available for energy efficient equipment.
Fossil fuels: combustible fossile– Gas, oil, petrol and diesel are fossil fuels which are finite and will run out.
Most are also bad for the atmosphere and believed to be encouraging global warming.
Ground source heating: énergie géothermique – Converts hot water or steam from below the surface of the
earth into electricity. It is also known as Geothermic heating.
Heat pump: pompe à chaleur– A heat pump is a devise that converts latent heat (the heat from a source found
above or below ground into a more useful heat source). The most common form is a fridge.
Hydropower: énergie hydraulique– Is when energy is produced from moving water, such as from tidal power or
from rivers using turbines.
Hydroelectricity: énergie hydroélectrique, or hydroélectricité – Is when the energy produced from water is
used to generate electricity.
Insulation: isolation – Is added to buildings for comfort and energy efficiency; it can be anything from double
glazing to boards placed inside walls.
Natural gas: gaz naturel – Is a gas consisting mainly of methane, it is found with other fossil fuels such as in
coal beds.
Nuclear energy: énergie nucléaire – Nuclear Energy is heat produced by nuclear fission. It is seen as a long
term alternative to fossil fuels for power stations.
Renewable energy: énergies renouvelables – Is energy from “green” sources which, unlike fossil fuels, won’t
run out. Solar power, wind power, tidal power and biomass are all examples.
Solar energy: énergie solaire – Solar energy refers to energy produced from the sun or light for electricity.
Solar panels: panneaux solaires– Are panels usually attached to roofs which use light energy (photons) from
the sun to generate electricity through the photovoltaic effect.
Solar thermique: énergie solaire thermique – Is when heat from the sun is used to warm your water.
Photovoltaic: photovoltaïque – Photovoltaic is the process of converting light into electricity, and is how solar
energy works.
Timber home: maisons à ossature bois– A timber home is wooden framed house. They are eco-friendly
because wood is an ecologically sound and renewable material.
Wind power: énergie éolienne – Is when energy is produced from the wind. This is usually done by a wind
turbine and the energy generates electricity.
Tidal power: énergie marémotrice – This is when the movement of tides is used to create electricity.
Turbine (same) – A turbine has blades at one end and electromagnets at the other which create electricity as the
blades move.

Source: The Environment: English / French Vocabulary

http://www.english-for-techies.net/mainstream%20vocabulary/environment.htm

17 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.

ANSWERS: EX 2

Expand: Complete the phrases following using an appropriate combination of verb+ preposition in
the correct form.
Example: Business leaders should have listened to the scientific community decades ago.

1. Climate change activists need to explain to world leaders that inaction is not an option.
2. Governments must be convinced of the need for drastic action to combat climate change.
3. Respiratory illness caused by the burning of fossil fuel accounts for 25% of all deaths in
developing countries.
4. Transition to renewable energy, coupled with desalinisation of sea water, will ensure an
adequate supply of fresh water for future generations.
5. We should all be disposing of waste in a responsible, environmentally friendly manner.
6. Future generations will benefit from unpopular decisions taken today.
7. Tree-huggers are calling for a total ban on the use of fossil fuels.
8. The challenges of transitioning to a circular economy are not insurmountable.
9. The reactions to nations boycotting the COP 26 speak volumes about the enormous hurdles
to energy transition.
10. In the long run, studies show that it is more cost-effective to participate in energy transition
schemes.
11. The developed world has yet to consent to huge financial aid programs for developing
nations.
12. People most commonly associate rising sea levels with global warming
13. Simply put, the world is not equipped for the consequences of inaction on climate change.
14. Over one-third of respondents to a nationwide survey stated that financial
costs prevented them from upgrading their homes to a more energy efficient level.
15. At the last summit lobbyists, for the big business, argued for more relaxed climate regulation
which would stimulate economic growth.

Les ressources reproduites dans ce support font l’objet d’une déclaration auprès du CFC.

18 INSP 2022 Green Transition Part 1 v.p.