This chapter examines the ambitious, yet complex, effort to elevate ecocide to the status of an international crime within the Rome Statute. Despite growing consensus on the necessity of prosecuting massive environmental destruction, formidable obstacles persist: fragmented legal traditions, geopolitical tensions, and conceptual vagueness. The proposed amendment by the Stop Ecocide Foundation reveals progress, but also compromise—defining ecocide as unlawful or reckless acts with catastrophic consequences, yet leaving space for human-centered cost-benefit analyses. Moreover, the International Criminal Court’s structural limitations, accusations of neocolonial bias, and cumbersome procedures further complicate the path. The analysis challenges readers: Can a court designed to address human atrocities adequately tackle crimes against nature itself? Or does the fight against ecocide demand entirely new paradigms and institutions? In raising these questions, the chapter invites both legal scholars and policymakers to confront the uncomfortable possibility that existing international frameworks may be inherently ill-suited to address the planetary-scale crises of the Anthropocene.