Case by case, the activist insists that they be climate equal

“We may be less well known than the Youth Climate Movement, but there are many more of us: We Older Women Against Climate Change.” In a trendy-looking campaign video, a group of elderly Swiss women speak the words with confidence. this “clima”As they call themselves Wed noon Before the Great Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights. Activists are suing the Swiss government for human rights violations.

Their government, according to activists, falls short in tackling carbon dioxide₂It is responsible for the suffering of old women, who are relatively unaffected by temperature extremes. This reasoning isn’t intuitive (yet): it’s the first time the European Court of Human Rights has heard a climate case, which in itself would mean a victory for climate activists.

Legal landslide

If KlimaSeersenen wins the case, it would mean a potential legal earthquake for the 47 states party to the European Convention on Human Rights. A large number of lawsuits from environmental clubs against governments are likely to follow, according to University of Groningen environmental law professor Gerrit van der Veen. And, in his words, victory is certainly not excluded: “In light of modern jurisprudence, I give them a chance.” The fact that the European Court of Human Rights operates by hearing the case with seventeen judges, who together make up the Great Chamber, “in any case indicates how much importance is given to this case in the Court”.

According to Professor Ludwijk Smihuisen, Professor of Private Law at VU University Amsterdam, the appeal of the Klima seniors for human rights is an attractive option: “Climate change can have significant impacts on human rights.” Environmental groups around the world have increasingly recognized that, Graduated from the London School of Economics. Between 1986 and 2014, just over eight hundred climate cases were conducted. Twelve hundred more have been added through 2022.

Legal arguments from court cases can often be clearly transferred from one climate group to another

But the victories of environmental organizations in court are far from clear. Climate cases repeatedly face the same legal problem, sees Smihuisen. “Governments and individual companies are powerless to avoid the catastrophic consequences of climate change.” Even if the judge rules in favor of the activists, the negative consequences of climate change still linger after the ruling. “Normally, a judge will show you the door right away if he knows his ruling won’t have a direct impact on your situation,” says Smehuisin. So the lion’s share of climate activists are legally behind the network.

This includes KlimaS Seniorinnen, which in 2016 sued the Swiss government for allegedly violating the Paris climate treaty because it would not limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. The judge dismissed the charge. After all, international agreements have been made to reduce emissions, according to the court, and even if the 1.5-degree limit is not reached, it won’t happen for decades. By then, the old Klima would have long been dead, so their human rights could not be violated. The seniors have been in litigation for six years, culminating in the case of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

A legal shot of hail

Activists often use such “chill” to see what works. For example, Mobilization for the Environment threatens to go to court if a number of Dutch provinces do not revoke onerous agricultural permits. Sometimes it comes to the spot, as in the Netherlands in recent years. For example, there was the high-profile 2015 Urgenda case, where the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that CO₂Emissions, compared to 1990, should fall by 25 percent by 2020. Not long after that, climate activists struck again: in 2021, the court in The Hague ruled that Shell had to cut its emissions by 45 percent in a year 2030. Both statements came out of the blue, says Prof. Smihuzen. But it’s no coincidence either.