Is this the year we get serious about tackling environmental crime?
· 10 min read
Despite the headwinds, multilateral endeavors continue, and 2026 will be a defining year for how States decide to collectively tackle the scourge of transnational, organized, environmental crimes, most often referred to as crimes that affect the environment (CAE).
If we cast our minds back just over a decade, there was little being said about CAE, with tackling wildlife trafficking being a notable exception. There was no dialogue about strengthening the international legal framework to tackle CAE, such as through adopting an additional protocol(s) under the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC).
That all started to change with the ‘soft’ launch of the Global Initiative to End Wildlife Crime (EWC) on 3 March 2020 at the UK House of Lords. EWC stimulated a much-needed conversation amongst States and stakeholders on the potential benefits of embedding tackling wildlife trafficking into the international criminal law framework through adopting an additional protocol under the UNTOC.
This idea had found favor with a small and enthusiastic group of experts and organizations, which has since grown to include over 60 organizations from across every sector and region. It is States alone that make international law and, right from the outset, the focus of the EWC was to engage with States, especially biodiverse rich States, which were feeling the full brunt of the severe consequences of wildlife trafficking.
EWC was always well received by the many States it engaged with in Vienna and beyond; some being interested but wanting to know more, others being a little skeptical, and some embracing the idea. Certain well-known organizations dismissed the idea, with most changing their opinion over time, while many other organizations fully embraced it from the outset.
Two States that embraced the idea early were Costa Rica and Gabon, followed shortly thereafter by Angola and Malawi, with other States, such as Kenya and Peru, and more recently Brazil, leading global efforts to advance this conversation through intergovernmental fora. France led on many UN resolutions on CAE, but it has stopped short of calling for an additional protocol on CAE, although it has been open to the idea.
The Presidents of Gabon and Costa Rica jointly called for an additional protocol under the UNTOC to prevent and combat wildlife trafficking on 17 May 2021, and the then Minister for Environment, Forest and Oceans of Gabon, personally carried the call of the Presidents to the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (CCPCJ) meeting on 17 May 2021.
Gabon had been a leader in advancing efforts to tackle wildlife trafficking, including through co-chairing the UN Friends process in New York - with Germany - that led to the adoption of the first ever UNGA Resolution on ‘Tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife’, in 2015. Gabon and Germany still co-chair the UN Friends ten years on.
Later in 2021 the Presidents of Angola and Malawi joined with Gabon and Costa Rica. This message conveyed by Gabon to the CCPCJ in 2021 was the start of a long intergovernmental process that will culminate in critical decisions later this year.
In May 2022 Angola, Kenya and Peru made a bold move. They took a draft Resolution to the CCPCJ on ‘Strengthening the international legal framework for international cooperation to prevent and combat illicit trafficking in wildlife’ that included reference to an additional protocol under the UNTOC. After some challenging negotiations, this Resolution was adopted by consensus and was co-sponsored by 12 other States, including Colombia, Gabon and the USA.
This groundbreaking CCPCJ Resolution was the first time any UN Resolution referenced a possible protocol to the UNTOC addressing any CAE, in this case wildlife trafficking. It called for an intergovernmental process to share States’ views “on possible responses to address any gaps in the international legal framework to prevent and combat wildlife trafficking, including the potential of an additional protocol to the UNTOC”.
This intergovernmental process was conducted by the UNODC, and it resulted in 57 States expressing support, or not being opposed to, a protocol on wildlife trafficking. However, several States that were open to the idea also expressed the view that its scope should be expanded to cover a broader range of CAE.
This was the spark that led to subsequent CCPCJ and UNTOC Resolutions on CAE, namely ‘Enhancing measures to prevent and combat crimes that affect the environment falling within the scope of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime’ by the UNTOC at CoP 12 in October 2024 and ‘Tackling illicit trafficking in wild fauna and flora, including timber and timber products, the illegal mining of and illicit trafficking in minerals and precious metals, the illicit trafficking in waste and other crimes that affect the environment’ by the CCPCJ in May 2025 (that was transmitted to the UNGA and adopted in December 2025).
We have also seen UNODC release valuable reports on a range of CAE, perhaps most notably its Global Analysis on Crimes that Affect the Environment in 2024, with other organizations outside of the UN, including the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime (GITOC), EWC, and a number of EWC International Champions releasing valuable articles and reports.
EWC defined wildlife as including all wild fauna, flora and funga, including timber species and marine species. One often sees timber and fish dealt with as separate CAE.
While maintaining its focus, EWC deepened its partnership with two of its International Champions, the International Council of Environmental Law (ICEL) and IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL), both of which are addressing the full suite of CAE. Following the adoption of the IUCN Resolution on ‘Crimes that Affect the Environment’ at the 2025 World Conservation Congress, the WCEL established a CAE Specialist Group.
The driving force behind the current intergovernmental discourse is the UNTOC Resolution on ‘Enhancing measures to prevent and combat crimes that affect the environment falling within the scope of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime’. It was proposed by Brazil, France, and Peru and after long negotiations adopted by consensus and co-sponsored by 44 States. Amongst other things, it established an intergovernmental expert group (IEG) to carry out several tasks, including to consider the “possibility, feasibility and merits” of any additional protocol to the Convention. The IEG meetings are not open to observers (other than those with UNGA observer status) but its chair, Carlos Sánchez del Águila from Peru, has been engaging with non-State actors through a series of briefings and panel sessions.
The IEG first officially met from 30 June to 2 July 2025 and it will have its second, and final, meeting from 24 to 26 February 2026. At that meeting “any consensual recommendations” will be adopted, with a draft already available online. They will be transmitted to the 13th UNTOC CoP in October 2026 together with the Chair’s summary of the IEG’s deliberations.
It is anticipated that a State or States will present a draft Resolution to UNTOC CoP 13 to establish a process for negotiating a new protocol(s) on CAE. The form of a possible protocol(s) will likely be discussed, along with the possible content.
Such a Resolution is unlikely to be adopted by consensus but the UNTOC CoP rules of procedure provide that where there is no consensus, a resolution can be adopted by a two-thirds majority of States Parties present and voting.
While momentum has been building behind an additional protocol(s) there is also some resistance coming from a few States. This is not unusual when advancing new ideas.
It is worth recalling that the UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution of 2019 that established the process that led to the adoption of the UN Convention against Cybercrime (‘the UN Convention’), was only passed following a contentious vote. 79 States voted for the Resolution, 60 voted against, and 33 abstained.
Several States that initially opposed, abstained from, or expressed reservations about the negotiation of the UN Convention have since signed it. The UN Convention was adopted by the UNGA in December 2024 without a vote and 72 States have since signed it.
The resistance to CAE was most evident during the negotiations on the outcome document for the G20 under the South African Presidency, where the original language on CAE was toned down following negotiations, and the failed draft resolution on ‘Enhancing international response to address crimes that affect the environment’ presented to the UNEA 7 meeting in December 2025. There are various reasons behind this resistance, and in relation to the UNEA draft Resolution, issues of the respective mandates of UNEP and UNODC emerged.
Between the February IEG meeting and the UNTOC CoP, there will be two events of interest, the UN Crime Congress in Abu Dhabi from 25 to 30 April and the 35th session of the CCPCJ from 1 to 5 June. The main outcome document from the UN Crime Congress, to be called the Abu Dhabi Declaration, is being pre-negotiated. The drafts seen to date include several specific paragraphs on CAE, adding important impetus to UNTOC CoP 13.
There are also several ancillary events proposed on CAE at the Congress, coming from States and civil society. One would not expect the CCPCJ to receive any draft resolutions on CAE, but it will be an important meeting point on the way to the UNTOC CoP.
Running parallel to these events is the work of the ‘Coalition for Multilateral Action against Crimes that Affect the Environment’ (‘the Coalition’), launched by Brazil on November 4th 2025, in Rio de Janeiro, at an event attended by the Brazilian Ministers of Environment and Climate Change, Marina Silva, and of Indigenous Peoples, Sônia Guajajara.
The Coalition exists to “promote multilateral action against crimes that affect the environment and to establish a binding legal framework under the UNTOC to address this challenge” and it now includes fifteen State members, as well as a growing number of civil society organizations. ICEL and EWC were founding members of the Coalition.
The launch of the Coalition was given support by The Royal Foundation, which has been very active in advancing collective efforts to tackle illegal wildlife trade (IWT) since the 2014 London Conference on IWT. In 2025, The Foundation expanded its scope and lent support to the G20 Presidency of South Africa, the launch of the Coalition, and co-hosted an event on CAE at the Villars Summit.
The Coalition is an important platform being led by Brazil through which like-mined States will advance calls for an additional protocol(s).
In looking ahead, it’s important to recall that efforts to advance an additional protocol(s) under the UNTOC is not intended to address all CAE. It is specifically focused on crimes falling within the scope of the UNTOC. As the Background paper to the IEG reminds us, such crimes cover offences that may be transnational in nature and involve an organized criminal group.
While States may wish to penalise some conduct that affects the environment, they may not always want to criminalise it or not include it into an international agreement. For example, this may be the case with some conduct in the fisheries sector. States will no doubt carefully reflect upon the conduct they seek to criminalise though an international agreement, recognising they will be free to take stronger measures domestically.
Further, the CAE that States seek to include in an international agreement may evolve over time. For example, there is an emerging consensus on including wildlife trafficking, with growing support on timber (if it is seen as falling outside of wildlife), but less consensus on other CAE. As such, it has been proposed that States may wish to consider an additional protocol that enables specific crimes to be included over time through a series of Annexes.
By the end of this year, we will know what direction States decide to take. We will be there every step of the way lending our support to States, upon request, including to the IEG, and through the Coalition for Multilateral Action against Crimes that Affect the Environment.
illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.
Track the real‑world impact behind the sustainability headlines. illuminem’s Data Hub™ offers transparent performance data and climate targets of companies driving the transition.
1. Executive President, ICEL; Chair, IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law Specialist Group on CAE; Chair, EWC; Chair, UK Illegal Wildlife Trade Challenge Fund. Former Secretary General, CITES; Principal Adviser to the UNEP Executive Director; Head, IUCN Environmental Law Programme.
2. Executive Officer, ICEL; Vice-Chair, IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law Specialist Group on CAE; Policy Advisor, EWC.
illuminem briefings
Carbon Market · Public Governance
illuminem briefings
Public Governance · Social Responsibility
illuminem briefings
Carbon Market · Public Governance
Financial Times
Minerals · Energy Sources
The Economist
Carbon Market · Carbon Regulations
Deutsche Welle
Carbon Market · Public Governance