‘Switzerland failed citizens on climate crisis’
STRASBOURG: The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled on Tuesday in favour of a group of elderly Swiss women who had argued that their government’s inadequate efforts to combat climate change put them at risk of dying during heatwaves.
The European court’s decision on the case, brought by more than 2,000 women, could have a ripple effect across Europe and beyond, setting a precedent for how some courts deal with the rising tide of climate litigation argued on the basis of human rights infringements.
Court President Siofra O’Leary said the Swiss government had violated the human right to a private and family life, by failing to put in place sufficient domestic policies to tackle climate change.
“This included a failure to quantify, through a carbon budget or otherwise, national greenhouse gas emissions limitations,” O’Leary told the courtroom.
She also noted the Swiss government had failed to meet its past greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, by not putting in place measures to ensure the goals were achieved.
Global civic movement Avaaz said the court’s ruling had opened a new chapter in climate litigation.
“The Swiss ruling sets a crucial legally binding precedent serving as a blueprint for how to successfully sue your own government over climate failures,” said Ruth Delbaere, legal campaigns director at Avaaz.
However, the court threw out two other similar cases, the first brought by six Portuguese youth against 32 European governments and another by a former French mayor against the French government.
“I really hoped that we would win against all the countries so obviously I’m disappointed that this didn’t happen,” Sofia Oliveira, one of the Portuguese youngsters said in a statement.
“But the most important thing is that the Court has said in the Swiss women’s case that governments must cut their emissions more to protect human rights. So, their win is a win for us too and a win for everyone!”
STRASBOURG, FRANCE: Europe’s top rights court on Tuesday said Switzerland was not doing enough to tackle climate change, in the first such ruling on the responsibility of states in curbing global warming.
The European Court of Human Rights, part of the 46-member Council of Europe, however threw out two other cases against European states on procedural grounds.
Hopes had been high for a legal turning point ahead of the rulings in the three cases, treated as a priority by the 17 judges of the court’s Grand Chamber.
In the first case, the court found that the Swiss state had violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the “right to respect for private and family life”, according to the ruling seen by AFP.
The case was brought by the Swiss association of Elders for Climate Protection — 2,500 women aged 73 on average — and four of its members, who complained about the “failings of the Swiss authorities” in terms of climate protection that could “seriously harm” their health. The court ordered the Swiss state to pay the association €80,000 (almost $87,000) within three months.
In a second case, the court dismissed a petition from six Portuguese people, aged 12 to 24, against 32 states including their own because the case had not exhausted all avenues at the national level. Their case was not only against Portugal but also 31 other states — every European Union country, plus Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and Russia.
Almost all European countries belong to the Council of Europe, not just the 27 EU members. Russian was expelled from the council after its invasion of Ukraine but cases against Moscow are still heard at the court.
In a third case, the court rejected a claim from a former French mayor that the inaction of the French state posed the risk of his town being submerged under the North Sea.
The court found that Damien Careme, former mayor of the northern French coastal town of Grande-Synthe, was not a victim in the case as he had moved to Brussels at the time of his initial complaint in 2021.
In 2019, he filed a case at France’s Council of State — its highest administrative court — alleging “climate inaction” on the part of France.