This paper critiques the 2021 draft definition of ecocide proposed by the Independent Expert Panel, arguing that its anthropocentric foundations limit both environmental protection and justice for marginalized communities. It challenges the binary between anthropocentrism and ecocentrism and turns to Fourth World Approaches to International Law (FWAIL) to highlight how dominant legal frameworks continue to reflect colonial legacies and exclude Indigenous worldviews. The analysis shows that the definition’s cost-benefit logic, particularly the wantonness threshold, legitimizes environmentally harmful state actions when justified by human benefits. The paper concludes that a more inclusive and just definition of ecocide must move beyond this model and incorporate a relational understanding of human-nature interaction grounded in decolonial and Indigenous perspectives.