Swiss women win landmark climate victory at human rights court

Subject: Environment

Section: Int Conventions

Context:

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled in favour of a group of Swiss women, affirming that Switzerland’s insufficient actions to mitigate climate change infringe on their human rights, particularly the right to a private and family life.

Details:

This landmark decision, influenced by the case brought forward by over 2,000 women citing the increased risk of death from heatwaves, sets a precedent in Europe for future climate litigation based on human rights.
The court found that Switzerland failed to adequately outline national greenhouse gas emissions limitations and to achieve its greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
This ruling hailed as a significant milestone by the global civic movement Avaaz, establishes a legally binding precedent that could guide future legal actions against governments for failing to address climate change adequately.
Despite the ECtHR dismissing two similar cases, the Swiss verdict represents a victory not just for the plaintiffs but also for broader efforts to hold governments accountable for their climate policies.
This decision, which cannot be appealed, may compel the Swiss government to intensify its emission reduction efforts and align its 2030 targets with the Paris Agreement’s objective to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
The ruling is part of a larger trend of using human rights law as the foundation for climate litigation against governments.

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR):

ECtHR, also known as the Strasbourg Court, is an international court of the Council of Europe which interprets the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The court hears applications alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human rights enumerated in the convention or its optional protocols to which a member state is a party.
The court is based in Strasbourg, France.
The court was established on 21 January 1959 on the basis of Article 19 of the European Convention on Human Rights when its first members were elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
The court decided its first case in 1960 in Lawless v. Ireland.
An application can be lodged by an individual, a group of individuals, or one or more of the other contracting states.
Aside from judgments, the court can also issue advisory opinions. The convention was adopted within the context of the Council of Europe, and all of its 46 member states are contracting parties to the convention.
The court’s primary means of judicial interpretation is the living instrument doctrine, meaning that the Convention is interpreted in light of present-day conditions.
International law scholars consider the ECtHR to be the most effective international human rights court in the world.
Nevertheless, the court has faced challenges with verdicts not implemented by the contracting parties.

Source: TH