“Climate justice must not stop at borders” NGOs have told the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), in what has been labelled a “landmark case”.
As the ECHR considers the case on climate change, which has been brought by six young people from Portugal against 33 European countries including Ireland, Amnesty International and other human rights organisations and academics have provided the court with legal arguments “on how government climate policies must protect the rights of people outside their borders”.
‘Climate crisis does not respect borders’
Ashfaq Khalfan, Amnesty’s law and policy director said that the climate crisis “does not respect borders and our laws and policies must reflect this”.
“To ensure justice for people most affected by heatwaves, drought and forest fires – particularly children – states must be required to tackle climate change and its impacts at home and abroad,” he added.
“Governments can no longer act as if people outside their borders do not matter when they design their climate policies.”
The crowd-funded case – Duarte Agostinho and others v Portugal and Others – has been brought by six young people who are accusing the 33 countries of violating their human rights, including their right to life, by not taking adequate steps to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
“Those affected by climate change should be allowed to make claims against governments other than their own,” Professor Mark Gibney of the University of North Carolina Asheville said.
“If governments are only required to act on the rights of people living within their borders, it is easier for them to ignore the impacts on people in the most affected countries and be more lethargic in their work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”
If allowed to proceed, the case could set an important precedent, clearing the way for other climate lawsuits based on human rights arguments.
“This case is also important to ensure governments are required to design climate policy in a way that recognises the particular climate risks to children and take the ambitious climate protection measures needed to protect their rights,” Gamze Erdem Türkelli of the University of Antwerp said.
The case
The goal of this case is “to seek a legally binding decision from the ECHR requiring governments in Europe to take the urgent action needed to stop the climate crisis”, according to the Global Legal Action Network.
“The youth applicants argue that European countries must not only adopt much deeper and immediate cuts to emissions released within their borders, but also tackle their contributions to emissions released overseas, for example through their exports of fossil fuels.”
The case was first filed in September 2020.
“First, within weeks of its filing, the court decided to fast-track the case based on the ‘importance and urgency of the issues raised’.
“It then ‘communicated’ the case to the respondent governments – the formal term for requiring the governments to respond to the case. This was a very significant development as the vast majority of cases filed with the ECHR are dismissed as being inadmissible without being communicated.
“Following the communication of the case, the respondent governments simultaneously wrote to the court asking it to overturn its decision to fast-track the case.
“They also asked the court for an opportunity to argue that the case is inadmissible and should not be heard prior to having to defend their climate policies.”
Both requests were rejected by the court. Governments must now respond to the case in full by May 27. When this is done, the youth applicants will then be given a deadline to respond in turn by the court.