Environmental criminal liability stands as a pillar of ecological preservation. Anchored in Art. 225, § 3 of the Constitution and developed under Law n. 9.605/98, it melds with the criminal code to address the malfeasance that jeopardizes environmental balance. This framework often relies on blank criminal laws, necessitating external statutes or administrative rules to define complex criminal types. Prosecution is unconditioned; the Public Prosecutor must act irrespective of civil settlements or administrative outcomes. Liability extends to individuals and corporations. For individuals, culpability hinges on intent or negligence, eschewing strict liability. Still, directors or agents failing in their duties face accountability for omissions. Corporate liability, a trailblazing development, recognizes legal entities as criminally accountable when offenses occur for their benefit. This does not absolve individuals involved. While early jurisprudence supported the double imputation requirement, demanding concurrent prosecution of individuals and entities, recent rulings allow independent corporate liability. Penalties diverge: individuals may face imprisonment or fines, mitigated by decriminalization measures, while entities encounter fines, rights restrictions, or community service. Notably, sanctions for public entities remain contentious.