Europe’s preeminent human rights tribunal, the European Court of Human Rights, delivered an unprecedented verdict on Tuesday, ruling that countries must intensify their efforts to shield their populations from the repercussions of climate change. This decision emerged from a lawsuit by a group of elderly Swiss women, marking a significant moment that could influence policies across the continent.
While the court dismissed two other climate-related cases on procedural grounds, including one from a Portuguese youth and another by a French mayor demanding more aggressive governmental action on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the Swiss lawsuit stands out. It establishes a legal benchmark for future climate change litigation within the 46 member states of the Council of Europe.
Corina Heri, a climate change litigation expert at the University of Zurich, described the ruling as a turning point. It signifies the first occasion an international court has adjudicated on climate change, affirming that nations are responsible for safeguarding their citizens from its impacts.
Heri anticipates that this ruling will pave the way for additional legal challenges within the Council of Europe’s jurisdictions, encompassing the 27 European Union nations and other countries ranging from Britain to Turkey. This decision has been particularly impactful for activists and plaintiffs like 19-year-old Sofia Oliveira (one of the Portugese plaintiffs), who sees the Swiss victory as a triumph for everyone advocating for more stringent emissions cuts to protect human rights.
The court highlighted Switzerland’s failure to meet its climate change combatting obligations, marking this an infringement of the rights protected under the European Convention on Human Rights. This convention mandates adequate state protection against the severe adverse effects of climate change on individuals’ lives, health, and well-being.
The plaintiffs, Senior Women for Climate Protection, with an average age of 74, argued their heightened vulnerability to climate change-induced extreme heat. The court’s recognition of their fundamental right to a healthy environment has been hailed as a victory for ambitious measures to safeguard health and future generations.
Switzerland’s response to the ruling is anticipated, with representatives committing to study the decision carefully and implement necessary measures in good faith. The European Court of Human Rights has left the specifics of climate change obligation fulfillment to the discretion of governments, emphasizing the role of democratic decision-making in enacting appropriate legal remedies.
This ruling acknowledges a broader trend where activists, concerned by governmental inaction on climate change, are increasingly resorting to legal avenues to enforce more robust climate policies. Similar legal victories have been recorded globally, including a notable decision in Montana, USA, where state agencies were found in violation of the constitutional right to a clean environment for allowing fossil fuel development.
As the European Union aims for climate neutrality by 2050 and global temperatures continue to rise, this decision reinforces the narrative that the climate crisis is an environmental issue and a critical human rights concern, necessitating immediate and decisive legal and policy responses to ensure global warming remains within internationally agreed limits.
