The European Court of Human Rights recently issued a groundbreaking opinion establishing protection from the effects of climate change as a human right under European law. The Court found that Switzerland’s inaction to meet their obligations under the Paris Agreement violated the plaintiffs’ right to respect for private and family life. The opinion was released on the same day as the dismissal of a higher profile climate change case.
The case, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland, was brought by a group of older women and an association concerned about the consequences of global warming on their living conditions and health. They argued that Switzerland had not taken sufficient legislative action to mitigate the effects of climate change as required under the Paris Agreement, which aims to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reaching net zero by 2050.
The enforcement of the obligations set out in the Paris Agreement has yet to be fully tested, despite being legally binding. In response to this, the United Nations General Assembly requested the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion on the legal obligations of countries in preventing climate change. This opinion, while non-binding, will provide guidance for future climate-related litigation and legislative development.
The European Court of Human Rights found that Switzerland had failed to comply with its duties under the Convention concerning climate change. The Court stated that inadequate state action to combat climate change can exacerbate risks to human rights, and individuals have a right to protection from serious adverse effects of climate change on their lives, health, well-being, and quality of life. The Swiss government was ordered to pay legal costs and expenses to the plaintiffs but no further damages were awarded.
While the Court acknowledged Switzerland’s violation of the Convention, it did not specify any particular actions for the Swiss government to take. The Court emphasized that its judgments are essentially declaratory in nature, and it is primarily up to the State concerned to choose the means to comply with its obligations under the Convention. The dismissal of the higher profile climate change case highlights the importance of proper legal procedure in bringing such cases to the European Court of Human Rights.
This landmark opinion by the European Court of Human Rights may have limited immediate impact as it pertains specifically to Switzerland. However, it opens the door to further litigation and could influence the interpretation of states’ obligations regarding climate change in their respective courts. It may also play a role in the forthcoming International Court of Justice advisory opinion on climate change obligations. Overall, this decision marks a significant victory for climate change activists and sets a precedent for future cases addressing the intersection of human rights and environmental issues.
