Should we call them criminals if they haven't been convicted? Aren't they entitled to the presumption of innocence and an opportunity to defend themselves?
We believe every person should be presumed innocent and be afforded an opportunity to defend themselves. Absolutely. Those are fundamental human rights. We aren’t seeking to haul folks before a revived Star Chamber, we are pursuing a sincere and authentic assessment of whether their actions constitute crimes against humanity. We think they should be held accountable for their actions in a proper judicial forum.
Problem is, there isn’t one available in the United States. And that’s why we believe the proper forum for the adjudication of climate crimes is the International Criminal Court.
Our governments (federal and state) recognize a range of corporate crimes and similar white-collar crimes: stock market manipulation, theft of trade secrets, and financial manipulation just to name a few. While arguably too rare, corporate executives have been convicted, sentenced, and jailed for various corporate crimes. Jeff Skilling committed various financial crimes while CEO of Enron, and various financial executives around the world were convicted of financial crimes for their actions causing the subprime mortgage crisis of the late 2000s, including Kareem Serageldin in the United States.
The U.S. Department of Justice defines criminal financial fraud as:
[W]hen a person or business intentionally deceives another with promises of goods, services, or financial benefits that do not exist, were never intended to be provided, or were misrepresented. Typically, victims give money but never receive what they paid for. Millions of people in the United States are victims of fraud crimes each year.
If a company can be held accountable for financial crimes that harm people financially, why can’t we hold companies responsible for climate crimes that harm people’s fundamental ability to live?
People lied about financial information to exploit and victimize people into buying new homes, which led to the subprime mortgage crisis, which led to the broader global financial collapse recession of the late 2000s and early 2010s. People lying about climate information to exploit and victimize consumers into buying goods and services has led to global warming, which is leading us directly into global climate and ecological collapse. Shouldn’t that be a crime, too? Especially when the consequences and repercussions of climate fraud are so much worse and millions more people will suffer increasingly greater harms.
We believe that a good, practical definition of criminal climate fraud is:
When a person or organization (business, political entity, media corporation) knowingly deceives another with promises about the negligible, benign, or even beneficial effects of global warming that do not exist or were intentionally misrepresented. Typically, victims give money to the person or business perpetuating these lies, but never receive what they paid for in return. Millions of people in the United States (and around the world) are victims of climate crimes each year.
What do you think? Should U.S. law define “climate crimes” similar to “financial crimes?
And if we can’t prosecute climate criminals in the United States, where can we go? We’ll start exploring that question next week.
Thank you for reading. Like, comment, and subscribe to our social media accounts on Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok. Join our Facebook group or comment below to continue the conversation. We are here for you.
