Are governments responsible for health woes linked to climate change?

In a 2022 heat wave in Switzerland, a majority of the casualties were senior women. So on April 9, two senior Swiss women sued the Swiss government for climate inaction that put them at risk of dying during heatwaves. The two women argued that their age and gender made them particularly vulnerable to such climate change impacts.

As a result of their lawsuit, Europe’s top human rights court ruled that the Swiss government had violated the human rights of its citizens by failing to do enough to combat climate change. This decision will set a precedent for future climate lawsuits.

In her ruling, court president Siofra O’Leary said the Swiss government failed to comply with its own targets for cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, failed to set a national carbon budget, and failed to meet its past GHG reduction targets.

“The Swiss ruling sets a crucial legally-binding precedent serving as a blueprint for how to sue your own government over climate failures,” said Ruth Delbaere, legal campaigns director at Avaaz — the global civic movement.

This ruling makes it no longer possible to contend that climate change is not a human-rights crisis. It will significantly benefit our children and grandchildren by protecting their health in the future.

The European Court of Human Rights’ ruling, in favour of the more than 2,000 Swiss women who brought the case, is expected to resonate in court decisions across Europe and beyond, and will embolden more communities to bring climate change cases against governments

The most important result from this ruling is that the court has said that all governments must cut their emissions more to protect human rights. So their win is also a win for Canada and for everyone globally.

This win in Switzerland could support similar frameworks to hold Canada accountable for failing to implement sufficient climate policies — thereby violating human rights — especially if a Conservative government is elected. Pierre Poilievre won’t commit to the Paris Accord’s emissions targets and doesn’t have a viable climatechange policy.

According to Canada’s National Observer, Poilievre’s climate policy is a joke and his endless debate over the carbon tax is just a distraction from the more important conversation on how to reduce more emissions in Canada. The majority of economists all agree that a price on carbon pollution remains the most effective way to reduce emissions.

According to Ecojustice lawyer, Fraser Thomson, the Swiss ruling is a huge win for climate litigation around the world.

“We know that Canada’s climate targets need to be ratcheted up and that our government can do more.” said Thomson.

Thomson leads the Ecojustice Charter climate case against the provincial Doug Ford government. When the government weakened its climate target, thereby putting the health of Ontarians at risk, seven young activists launched a fight against it in 2019, backed by Ecojustice. This case has overcome many hurdles, setting legal precedents along the way. It is the first Charterbased climate case to reach a full hearing in Canada — a legal battle which continues to this day.

The Swiss lawsuit has the potential to set a precedent for every government in the world — which will benefit all of us — especially when travelling. If this ruling had been implemented in Honduras in March when I had a severe reaction to toxic air pollution there (exacerbated by extreme heat and humidity), I could have sued the Honduran government for not openly disclosing a poor air quality/red alert warning to the public. This information was only available online if people actively researched it. The Honduran government is highly dependent upon tourism to bolster its economy so it didn’t want to scare tourists away with a poor air quality/red alert — especially in March during their peak tourism month.

I was unaware of how bad the air quality was in Honduras, so I took no precautions to prevent any adverse health effects. As a result, my respiratory tract became so inflamed from extended exposure to toxic air pollution that I was taken to a clinic there and hooked up to an oxygen tank. I could have died if my lungs and respiratory inflammation worsened.

I’m writing this column to warn others to please do their research on the effects of toxic air pollution and how to prevent lung damage from it. Simply closing all windows, operating ceiling fans and wearing an N-95 mask could prevent serious health effects.

All countries globally need to pass a similar ruling as in Switzerland to hold governments accountable for climate change-related health impacts. Thankfully, because of two brave Swiss seniors, we are now on our way to accomplishing this.

Europe’s top human rights court ruled that the Swiss government had violated the human rights of its citizens by failing to do enough to combat climate change