Abstract Illegal wildlife trade (IWT) remains one of the most profitable forms of transnational organized crime, posing escalating threats to biodiversity, public health, and global security. While the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) serves as the principal international framework for regulating wildlife trade, its over-reliance on state discretion—particularly in defining sanctions and permitting species-specific reservations—has led to fragmented enforcement and weakened deterrence. Through a focused legal analysis, with the European Union as a case study, this article explores how these structural shortcomings manifest in practice, exposing normative ambiguities and enforcement gaps that enable regulatory circumvention and foster impunity. To confront the scale and complexity of wildlife trafficking, this article advocates a fundamental recalibration of the international legal architecture—calling for tighter constraints on the use of reservations under CITES and the adoption of a dedicated protocol under the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) to criminalize IWT, harmonize penalties, and enhance cross-border cooperation—a reform that has become essential to building a unified, enforceable, and effective global response.
Meganne Natali (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: