Abstract
Wildlife crime is recognised as one of the most significant environmental crimes of our time. Environmental crimes arise from the deliberate violation of international and national environmental laws and regulations. Wildlife crime has been described as a global policy issue, a complex phenomenon with several layers and dimensions, a contemporary biodiversity threat of anthropocentric origin, an extremely fragmented environmental “issue” and a multilevel process with a complicated organisational structure that transcends national borders. Many experts agree that combatting wildlife crime poses diverse and unique challenges to the administration of justice, making it both an international and national priority. However, despite this prioritisation, wildlife crime is neither universally defined, nor is it encapsulated in an international treaty or strategy upon which countries can rely to determine best practices to combat this crime. In the meantime, the enormous responsibility for enacting legislation to combat wildlife crime rests with individual countries.
Wildlife crime is intricate and complex, involving various activities, related serious crimes, and role players in its commission. These crimes are acts or omissions that violate the provisions of international treaties or national environmental law and regulations. Four levels of activities that form part of wildlife crime can be distinguished, namely (a) poaching of wildlife; (b) transporting of and trading in wildlife; (c) processing wildlife into products; and (d) distributing and selling wildlife and their by-products. Although these activities may not always take place in the same order, wildlife crime is always initiated with the poaching of wildlife. The activities span the country of origin (of the wildlife species), various transit points, and final destinations, thereby creating additional challenges for law enforcement agencies. Numerous role players commit these acts on each of the four levels, and the relationships between them are complex and influenced by various factors. The role players approach the circumstances in which wildlife crime takes place pragmatically – they are adaptable and simply modify their working methods and poaching strategies, target markets, trade routes and even target species according to changing circumstances. Related serious crimes such as corruption, document fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, and non-payment of government fees, facilitate the administrative process and occur at all four levels of operation. Due to significant international policy shortcomings, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has positioned itself as a leader in the field and developed useful checklists, recommendations, and examples that countries may use as guidelines for formulating national legislation to combat wildlife crimes.
Although wildlife crimes are committed daily in South Africa, partly due to its abundant biodiversity, there is currently no dedicated South African legislation that exclusively defines and addresses the combatting of wildlife crime. Instead, South Africa addresses the combatting of wildlife crime in a fragmented manner through the country’s national environmental legal framework. This framework is mainly based on provisions in the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA), the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act 10 of 2004 (NEMBA); the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003 (NEMPAA), related regulations, provincial legislation and local (municipal) ordinances.
This article presents a comprehensive literature review of the legal-theoretical framework and approaches the issue from an environmental law perspective. First, the activities, related crimes and role players that form part of wildlife crime are theoretically analysed and described. Second, a concise version of the extensive and detailed checklists, recommendations, and examples formulated by the UNODC is included. It offers practical suggestions for formulating a coordinated national legal response to combat wildlife crime (as well as related serious crimes) and provides guidelines for comparing, improving and revising existing legislation. In a follow-up article, “Combatting wildlife crime: an analysis of the South African environmental law framework”, the existing environmental regulatory measures currently used by South Africa to combat wildlife crime are identified, analysed, and discussed in accordance with the theoretical framework that is established in this article.
The theoretical analysis and descriptions of the activities, related crimes, and role players reveal the complexities and instability associated with each level of the activities that form part of wildlife crime. These include, but not limited to, the different roles that role players assume; the dynamic nature of the activities; the involvement and influence of subsistence hunters and organised criminal groups; the distribution of activities across the different areas or countries; the contribution of technology, such as sophisticated equipment and the internet; and the way in which related serious crimes continuously facilitate the administrative process of committing wildlife crimes. In certain instances, subsistence hunters unknowingly commit wildlife crimes due to poverty, unemployment, and starvation, seeking food or economic gain. Organised criminal groups are particularly interested in wildlife crime as part of an effort to diversify their existing operations, driven by the substantial economic reward it offers. The activities committed at levels 2 to 4 do not necessarily occur in a fixed sequence, but poaching at level 1 can be described as the constant entry point of wildlife crime. The analysis also reveals that wildlife crime can be most effectively addressed at the poaching level, as disrupting this stage also impedes the activities at successive levels. According to the UNODC, the convergence of acts, related crimes and diverse actors necessitates a comprehensive and coordinated national legal response that avoids unnecessary duplication, complexity, and bureaucracy. Countries are therefore encouraged to formulate legislation that is simple and transparent, ensuring that law enforcement agencies and other stakeholders can easily understand it, while also acknowledging the complex nature of wildlife crime. The UNODC gives preference to approaches that use command-and-control measures to combat wildlife crime and suggests that national legislation should clearly reflect that the four levels of activities that form part of wildlife crime can be unlawful for various reasons.
Keywords: biodiversity; biodiversity law; combatting wildlife crime; environmental crime; environmental law; illegal wildlife trade; serious crimes; wild animals; wild species; wildlife crime; wildlife poaching
- This article’s featured image was compiled on Canva.