Image Credits: @markusspiske on Unsplash (Unsplash License)

Climate Catastrophe

The ice caps are melting, the sea levels are rising, and the Globe is warming. For the past two centuries, human activities have directly contributed to the progression of climate change, namely the combustion of fossil fuels and extensive deforestation. This has caused the Earth’s surface temperature to become 1.1°C warmer than pre-industrial levels. Despite this, governments around the world are struggling to take steps to combat this crisis, as their actions often fall short of their words. The lack of climate protection measures creates uncertainty for the future, especially for the younger generations, who will deal with these consequences within their lifetimes. As a result, youth activists use social media, protests, and education to create change. In recent years, environmentalist groups have turned to legal activism, filing lawsuits against businesses and governments to hold them accountable for their environmental impacts. While some cases were unsuccessful, others have promising results that could shape the future of environmental law.

Held v. Montana

In 2020, a group of 16 young plaintiffs sued Montana for violating their rights to a healthy environment, seeking safety, and equal protection under the law. The case focused on the state’s Environmental Policy Act, particularly the provisions promoting the extraction and use of fossil fuels. The plaintiffs stated that greenhouse gasses were “already triggering a host of adverse consequences in Montana,” which include high temperatures, more frequent extreme weather events, and increased health risks to children.

Three years after filing their lawsuit, the plaintiffs presented their case to a Montana trial court. Their evidence was compelling, highlighting the damage inflicted upon their property, financial stability, mental health, and beyond. This established the plaintiffs’ standing and revealed the consequences of the state’s disregard for greenhouse gases: harm to “Montana’s environment and its citizens, especially its youth.” By recognizing the link between climate and public health, the court declared that a healthy environment includes a stable climate. The court also encouraged the defendants to consider incorporating renewable energy into future policies, furthering progress in the fight for climate justice.

Neubauer, et al. v. Germany

With similar motives, a young group of Germans challenged their country’s federal Climate Change Act. This group included members from various environmental organizations, including Fridays for Future, an international movement of student activists. The complainants argued that the law insufficiently addressed climate change and the Paris Agreement goals. For instance, the Act aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 55% by 2030, compared to its 1990 levels. However, the country would have to cut its emissions by at least 70% for Germany to meet the Paris Agreement targets. The complainants argued that Germany’s shortcomings regarding climate protection violated their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Basic Law, namely the right to a future and a healthy environment.

In 2021, the Federal Constitutional Court, Germany’s highest court, ruled in favor of the complainants. The court decision concluded that reductions regarding greenhouse gas emissions in the Climate Change Act were inadequate, which would jeopardize “practically every type of freedom protected by fundamental rights.” The court also stated that the Act’s climate protection plans beyond 2030 were vague and called on the legislature to amend the Act to comply with the new ruling.

As a result, the German parliament passed a bill that amended previous provisions of the Act. This bill included stricter emission targets for all sectors of the economy in hopes of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 65% by 2030 and 88% by 2040. The new proposal aims for greenhouse gas neutrality by 2045, five years earlier than previously envisioned. For the first time, the law includes negative emission targets beyond 2050 by utilizing natural carbon sinks, such as forests and peatlands. While many environmental groups have welcomed this reform, representatives of the industrial and energy sectors are concerned about the harsh restrictions.

Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and 32 Other States

Continuing this wave of climate litigation, six young people from Portugal filed a lawsuit against the European Union states, the United Kingdom, Russia, Switzerland, Norway, and Turkey. The plaintiffs based their arguments on the European Convention on Human Rights, specifically violations of Articles 2, 8, and 14, “which protect the right to life, right to privacy, and right to not experience discrimination.” They also cited the Portuguese wildfires of 2017 as one of the direct impacts of climate change, in which over 120 people lost their lives and 500,000 hectares of land burned.

The case was decided in September 2023, but the court is waiting to release its official ruling until 2024. Despite its pending status, the case remains influential for several reasons. It marks the first time the European Court on Human Rights heard a climate-related case. Thus, the case has gained much attention, raising awareness for climate change regardless of the legal outcome. Another notable aspect is the plaintiffs’ ages, with the youngest being 11. By the time she turns 28, the UN panel of scientists predicts that the world will start facing the severe consequences of climate change. This demonstrates the need for governments to act now because human rights will continue to be compromised as climate change progresses.

The Landscape of Climate Lawsuits

Climate litigation is a significant development in holding governments and other polluters accountable for their actions. This legal action can serve as a catalyst for policy change, as it can set concrete standards or targets that governments must adhere to. In addition, favorable outcomes can set precedents that may help climate cases in the future. For example, the ruling established in Held v. Montana could be referred to in other cases across the United States, resulting in similar outcomes that would strengthen the case for climate action. Furthermore, climate-related cases can shape public opinion by raising awareness of this issue. These cases empower environmental activists to educate the public about climate change, hopefully increasing public support to solve the issue. Spurred by mounting public pressure, legislatures may start taking action themselves rather than being compelled by court decisions.

Climate cases addressing other human rights issues are expected to increase in the future. This could include cases of migrants who are forced to relocate due to the effects of climate change. Additionally, indigenous communities face a disproportionate burden compared to other groups, highlighting inequalities associated with the climate crisis. As a driving force in environmental law, climate litigation empowers activists to push boundaries and secure legal precedents for a more sustainable future.