Except there are already laws that exist in these countries that need to be enforced. An extra-judiciary force for something that should be taken care of in-house is just unnecessarily power wielding that
will be abused. If it was an investigative force that questioned and pushed why certain countries were unevenly utilizing certain laws already enacted, awesome. Sort of like oversights for elections. That I can hesitantly get behind.
All this current concept of political environmentalism does is give another law enforcement and judicial system in the hands of a political few.
Also, don't think I'm for dawdling. You know the best way to get people to stop kicking dogs? Bounce their heads off pavement. I take a very rash and violent viewpoint on how to curb purposeful misdeeds. My biggest thing, make sure you uphold a systematic process of judicial proceedings. Fair trials. Rules and procedures are clear and easy to follow. Evidence based. Ability to fully defend yourself in a court of law. Context. Even legal handedness. The most guilty piece of shit still deserves a fair trial and to be considered innocent until proven guilty. This whole ecocide thing smells of "guilty because we say so".
There's a system already in place to deal with the problems. The issue is, average people aren't educating themselves on it and how to utilize it. I can't speak for every country obviously, but I'm pretty sure most 1st world countries have some similar functions that allow petitioning and suing corps and gov like we can in the USA. The ability to sue is a dangerous tool as well, that is obviously abused. But it's useful as hell too.