Language
Country/Area
No result found
From human rights to administrative law: What are the diverse legal pathways to climate litigation?
As climate change becomes one of the most pressing issues in the world, climate litigation has become an important branch of environmental law. Such lawsuits typically involve legal challenges against states and companies aimed at promoting climate change mitigation efforts. Faced with slow progress on climate change policy, a growing number of activists and lawyers are turning to domestic and international judicial systems for legal avenues to strengthen climate action.
Climate litigation focuses on five categories of legal claims: constitutional law, administrative law, private law, consumer protection law and human rights law.
Among these legal claims, the Constitutional Law mainly focuses on the state's infringement of citizens' basic rights, while the Administrative Law challenges the rationality of administrative decision-making. Private law is mainly used to combat negligent behavior by companies, while consumer protection laws are used to stop misleading companies from misrepresenting their impact on the climate. Human rights law treats inaction as a violation of basic human rights, such as the right to a healthy environment.
With the continuous evolution of legal frameworks and international regulations, there are an increasing number of relevant cases in courts in various countries, forming a set of legal basis to promote climate action. These lawsuits all have a common goal: to promote climate justice, especially to support the climate movement among younger generations. The use of human rights-based arguments in climate litigation has become increasingly common since 2015.
High-profile climate litigation cases include: Leghari v. Pakistan, Juliana v. United States and Urgenda v. The Netherlands. Behind these cases are not only legal challenges, but also responsible attitudes towards future generations.
For example, in the case of Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan, the court ruled that the government had violated the country's climate change policy and required the establishment of a climate change committee to achieve policy goals. The "Urgenda case" became a major precedent in global climate litigation. The Dutch court required the government to reduce carbon emissions by 25% by 2015.
Climate-based legal action is emerging not only in the Netherlands but also in many countries. For example, Italy's Giudizio Universale case requires the government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 92% by 2030; and in Germany, the Supreme Court also held that the government's climate protection measures are not enough to protect future generations.
This type of litigation can not only be launched at the national level, but also increasingly occurs internationally, forming a diverse legal support system.
In addition, successful cases of climate litigation often attract the attention of domestic courts and encourage other countries to take more aggressive legal action. For example, South Korea’s Constitutional Court recently ruled that a policy that fails to set legally binding greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for future generations is unconstitutional, a ruling that has had a profound impact on climate legal action in other countries around the world.
However, the process of climate litigation has not been smooth sailing. Many cases have been challenged in legal proceedings or even dismissed. For example, the Juliana case in the United States failed to succeed after years of litigation. The complexity and longevity of these cases make litigants face significant challenges, both in terms of cost and time.
The rapid growth of climate litigation reflects the strong public demand for climate action and highlights the important role of the law in protecting the earth and the lives of its inhabitants.
According to the December 2022 report, global climate litigation cases have reached 2,180, of which the United States accounts for more than 900 cases, while there are multiple cases in other countries. At the same time, many international legal precedents are inspiring climate action by countries.
Among these legal approaches, the diversification of climate litigation has become one of the most forward-looking legal trends currently. As these cases increase, we can’t help but wonder, what will be the key breakthrough points in the legal battlefield to address climate change in the future?
