Europe’s Court of Human Rights concluded on Tuesday that the Swiss government did not fulfill its responsibility to address the effects of climate change on its citizens, and this ruling could have significant effects on other European countries.
The court supported a group of over 2,000 Swiss women, mostly aged 70 or older, known as the KlimaSeniorinnen, who argued that as elderly women, they are especially at risk from the effects of more frequent heat waves. They claimed that the Swiss government has an obligation to protect their lives and health under both national law and the European Convention on Human Rights. According to European case law, individuals involved in such cases must be a “particularly affected group.”
The plaintiffs contended that their government took too long to create a plan to reduce emissions in order to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as outlined in the Paris Climate Agreement. The court agreed with this point but did not support four individual litigants who joined the KlimaSeniorinnen.
The court stated, “The Convention includes the right to effective protection from the State authorities against the severe negative effects of climate change on lives, health, well-being, and quality of life.” The court found that the Swiss government did not meet its obligations ('positive obligations') under the Convention regarding climate change.
The court also dismissed two other climate-related lawsuits. The first, filed by a group of young people from Portugal against 32 European states, was rejected because the plaintiffs only had standing against their own government. The second lawsuit was against the French government and was brought by Damien Carême, a member of the European Parliament for France. The court rejected Carême’s claim against the French government because it concerned catastrophic flooding in the town of Grande-Synthe, where he was previously mayor but no longer resides.
Though the two other cases were rejected, the judgment in the Swiss case establishes a precedent for suing the other 45 members of the Council of Europe on the same basis.
“We anticipate that this ruling will impact climate action and climate legal proceedings throughout Europe and beyond,” stated Joie Chowdhury, Senior Attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law. Chowdhury believes that the ruling confirms that the climate crisis is a human rights crisis and that states have human rights responsibilities to act quickly and effectively, following the best scientific evidence, to prevent further harm to people and the environment.
