by Gianluca Di Donfrancesco
They are between 11 and 24 years old and accuse governments of not having done enough to combat global warming: they don’t want compensation, but rather more decisive action
3′ reading
A group of children against 33 states: The first case on climate change began on September 27th at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). It will be unprecedented in scope, encompassing the largest number of states ever sued simultaneously. The procedure is promoted by six Portuguese citizens, the youngest is 11 years old, the “eldest” is 24: the generation that will experience first-hand the most serious effects of global warming in the coming decades.
Human rights violated
The 27 governments of the European Union, as well as the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Norway, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine, are accused of human rights abuses by failing to adequately address climate change. The applicants appealed to the ECtHR without recourse to the Portuguese courts because they argue that national jurisdictions have not done enough to protect their rights and because they claim that the decision to act or not to address global warming cannot be left to the discretion of the states.
According to the arguments presented to the court, the plaintiffs are threatened with heat waves of more than 40 degrees that last at least 30 days due to the current development of global warming. The increasing risk from other phenomena such as fires, storms and infectious diseases is also highlighted. These threats would create paralyzing fear in the complainants, which is another central theme of the case.
Binding decisions
The rulings of the European Court of Human Rights are legally binding for member states and heavy fines are imposed for non-compliance. The decision is expected in the first half of 2024. A guilty verdict could force governments to accelerate plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is the goal of the plaintiffs, who are not seeking financial compensation. “We have presented evidence that states have the power to do much more to regulate their greenhouse gas emissions, but choose not to act,” said attorney Gerry Liston of the Global Legal Action Network, which is supporting the plaintiffs. A conviction “would be like a binding contract imposed by the court on the defendants,” Liston added. In addition, rulings by the European Court of Human Rights have an impact on cases heard in national courts.
“Without urgent measures to reduce emissions, the place where I live will soon become an uninhabitable blast furnace,” said one of the applicants, 20-year-old Martin Agostinho.
To win, plaintiffs must convince judges that they suffered direct harm, and they must prove that governments have a legal obligation to limit the rise in global temperatures to about 1.5 degrees compared to pre-industrial times and significantly to limit times below 2 degrees. , as enshrined in the 2015 Paris Agreement.
The defense of the European Union
The director of the European Commission’s legal service, who spoke as a third party in the case on behalf of the Union’s executive branch, defended Brussels’ climate policy: “The EU is going beyond the commitments of the Paris Agreement,” said Daniel Calleja Crespo. citing the goal of reducing net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 and achieving climate neutrality by 2050.
The proceedings, opened in September 2020, are the first case of this kind to be filed with the Strasbourg court. Two other similar lawsuits have since been filed, one by an association of elderly Swiss women against the Swiss government and the other by a French parliamentarian against Paris.
Climate change litigation is increasing worldwide, so much so that it has already been given a name: “climate litigation.” In August, a court in Montana, USA, handed down a historic ruling in favor of a group of activists.
Gianluca Di Donfrancesco
editor
View at ilsole24ore.com