In this blog, Karnavas analyzes whether the definition of ecocide is sound and how realistic is the possibility of the Assembly of States Parties adopting it as a fifth international core crime. He views the “initiative as unrealistic, the definition replete with flaws, and the commentary remarkably wanting.” Karnavas criticizes the misleading name of ecocide and its corresponding confusing mens rea. He also criticizes the process that led to the Commentary and Core text of ecocide due to the lack of information about the experts consulted and peer review processes. Furthermore, Karnavas argues that it is not realistic that ecocide would be adopted as a new crime considering the state of affairs of the ICC which should focus instead on more pressing issues. Lastly, he suggests pursuing domestic legal processes instead, such as imposing environmental injunctions or recognizing the rights of nature.