Ecocide: a new offence at the federal level
Publication · October 7, 2026
Belgium's new Criminal Code, which entered into force on 1 September 2026, counts ecocide among its new offences, as confirmed by the Federal Public Service Justice. Belgium has been presented as one of the first European States to enshrine such an offence in its criminal law. Ecocide is intended to capture the most serious harm to the environment, beyond the existing sectoral arrangements. This note describes its general scope and main uncertainties, without substituting for an examination of the consolidated text, to which reference should be made for any concrete application. The constituent elements and the penalty regime must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
The definition adopted draws on the international work devoted to the notion, in particular that carried out under the auspices of expert initiatives. It targets, in substance, the deliberate commission, by act or omission, of an unlawful act causing severe, widespread and long-term damage to the environment, in the knowledge that the act is harmful. This formulation combines a demanding material element — the severity, extent and duration of the damage — with a reinforced mental element. The threshold thus set is high, so that the offence is intended to target exceptional harm. The interpretation of each of these criteria nonetheless remains to be clarified by practice.
The scope of the offence is circumscribed by the federal structure of the State. Environmental matters fall, for the most part, within the competence of the Regions, so that the ecocide introduced at the federal level applies only to areas falling within the federal authority. Matters cited include the protection of the marine environment in the North Sea and the management of radioactive waste. This limitation is essential: it means that numerous forms of environmental harm will continue to fall under regional legislation and its own sanction mechanisms. The interplay between the federal offence and the regional arrangements is one of the points that will have to be clarified.
As regards sanctions, ecocide sits among the high levels of the new penalty scale, reflecting the seriousness attached to this type of harm. Scholarly sources refer, for natural persons, to substantial custodial penalties and, for legal persons, to fines of a significant amount. These indications must be verified against the official text and are reproduced here only as an order of magnitude. The exact amount of the penalties, any ancillary penalties and the arrangements applicable to legal persons cannot be presented as automatic and call for careful reading of the relevant provisions.
For companies, the introduction of ecocide invites a review of environmental compliance arrangements. While the high seriousness threshold limits the range of situations concerned, the existence of a dedicated criminal offence reinforces the requirement of prevention and risk control. Sectors exposed to matters of federal competence warrant particular attention. The criminal liability of legal persons, retained by the new Code, means that the company itself may, where appropriate, be pursued alongside natural persons. The mapping of risks, internal procedures and chains of responsibility would benefit from being reviewed in the light of this development.
Several uncertainties remain. The interpretation of the criteria of severity, extent and duration of the damage, proof of the mental element, or the interplay with existing environmental offences, are all open questions. The division of powers between the federal State and the Regions may give rise to debate as to the exact perimeter of the offence. In the absence of consolidated judicial practice, the effective scope of ecocide remains, at this stage, largely dependent on the first applications the courts will make of it. These uncertainties command caution and call for close monitoring of the evolution of litigation and of any legislative or regulatory clarifications.
Ecocide marks a symbolic step in the criminal recognition of major environmental harm, while remaining of limited application. For economic actors, the challenge lies in integrating this development into an overall compliance approach, without overestimating or underestimating its scope. This note is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The assessment of the scope, the penalty level and the interplay with the regional regimes must be conducted on a case-by-case basis, on the basis of the available consolidated text and in the light of the circumstances specific to each situation. The figures mentioned must be verified before any use.