ETEE7

48 Symposium on Combating Wildlife Crime
PLENARY SESSION 3
National Policy and Legal Frameworks
to Curb the Wildlife Trade
Ms. Patricia Moore, international legal expert and former head of the International Union for
Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Regional Environmental Law Programme Asia Division and Ecosystems
and Livelihoods Group Asia Division, recalled that during the first session that morning, the participants
heard about how governments need good laws, but many countries have confusing wildlife laws and weak
penalties. Ms. Moore said that this need not be the case because the CITES CoP gave clear instructions
on what member countries should have in their legislation to comply with CITES. She then asked the
participants to consider the problems resulting from weak penalties and loopholes in national wildlife laws
that traffickers could exploit, and to think of ways of strengthening national legislation.
Mr. John T. Webb, retired assistant chief of the Environmental Crimes Section of the US Department
of Justice, gave an overview of how wildlife traffickers are prosecuted in the US. He wanted the
participants to realize that the process of strengthening a country’s wildlife prosecution system takes time
and reminded them that law enforcement entails not just guidance but also punishment and deterrence.
Mr. Webb then walked the participants through the development of the Environmental Crimes Section
of the US Department of Justice, which considers the prosecution of international wildlife traffickers a
very serious matter. In 1978, then US President James Earl “Jimmy” Carter, Jr., an avid supporter of CITES
(also known as the Washington Convention) noted the growing trade in CITES-protected species and
the sophistication of the traffickers. President Carter therefore directed the US Department of Justice to
create within the department a special unit to prosecute illegal wildlife trade cases. The unit was called the
Wildlife and Marine Resources Section and later renamed the Environmental Crimes Section. About 40
prosecutors are engaged in the international prosecution of wildlife trafficking criminals, while another 100
federal prosecutors handle a part-time or full-time load of wildlife cases.
To ensure the effective enforcement of CITES, the US government itself complies with CITES and
punishes its citizens who violate the convention. However, a CITES violation in the US is penalized only as
a misdemeanor, which may merit imprisonment of 1 year or a fine of $100,000. The US government also
recognizes the complexity of wildlife laws and other environmental statutes, so it directs the prosecution
of wildlife cases based on white-collar crime. To ensure that wildlife cases and other environmental crimes
are treated seriously and are worthy of the time of the investigator, the prosecutor, and the court, the US
Department of Justice focuses its time and resources on developing expertise not only in investigating
wildlife cases but also in presenting them in court.
The US Department of Justice also uses the full array of US criminal justice statutes. For instance, in
prosecuting wildlife importers, instead of simply applying the pertinent wildlife statute, which carries only
a 1-year imprisonment sentence, the department applies the Langley Statute, among others, to impose
stiffer penalties. The Langley Statute penalizes the importation of merchandise in violation of another law
with 20 years’ imprisonment. The department also uses the anti–money laundering statute to seize the
proceeds of an illegal activity.
To end, Mr. Webb said that the Environmental Crimes Section of the US law enforcement system
follows a set of sentencing guidelines or sentencing criteria to determine which cases to prosecute based