 "European Court of human rights rules Switzerland not doing enough on climate change")
In a landmark decision, the European Court of Human Rights criticised Switzerland for its insufficient efforts to address climate change. The ruling, which could set a precedent for other governments, highlights the need for more ambitious climate policies.
While the court dismissed two other cases against European states due to procedural reasons, hopes were high for a legal breakthrough in the three cases, which were prioritised by the court’s Grand Chamber.
In the first case, the court found that Switzerland had violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, guaranteeing the “right to respect for private and family life.”
The Swiss association of Elders for Climate Protection, consisting of 2,500 women with an average age of 73, had raised concerns about the Swiss authorities’ shortcomings in climate protection, which could adversely affect their health.
As a result, the court ordered the Swiss state to pay the association 80,000 euros (approximately $87,000) within three months. Cordelia Bahr, the lawyer representing the Swiss association, hailed the decision, stating that the court recognized climate protection as a human right.
“It’s a huge victory for us and a legal precedent for all the states of the Council of Europe,” she said.
Activist Greta Thunberg said it was “only the beginning of climate litigation”.
“All over the world more and more people are taking their government to court, holding them responsible for their actions,” she said inside the court after attending the rulings.
Impact Shorts
More Shorts- ‘Historic’ -
Joie Chowdhury, a lawyer from the Center for International Environmental Law, said the ruling was “historic”.
“We expect this ruling to influence climate action and climate litigation across Europe and far beyond,” she said.
It “leaves no doubt: the climate crisis is a human rights crisis, and states have human rights obligations to act urgently and effectively… to prevent further devastation and harm to people and the environment,” she said.
Gerry Liston, of the NGO Global Legal Action Network, said before the rulings that a victory in any of the three cases could constitute “the most significant legal development on climate change for Europe since the signing of the Paris 2015 Agreement”.
The Paris Agreement set targets for governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The court decisions came as Europe’s climate monitor said March this year had been the hottest on record.
In a second case, the court dismissed a petition from six Portuguese people, aged 12 to 24, against 32 states including their own because the case had not exhausted all avenues at the national level.
Their case was not only against Portugal but also 31 other states – every European Union country, plus Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and Russia.
Almost all European countries belong to the Council of Europe, not just the 27 EU members.
Russian was expelled from the council after its invasion of Ukraine but cases against Moscow are still heard at the court.
- ‘Climate inaction’ -
In a third case, the court rejected a claim from a former French mayor that the inaction of the French state posed the risk of his town being submerged under the North Sea.
The court found that Damien Careme, former mayor of the northern French coastal town of Grande-Synthe, was not a victim in the case as he had moved to Brussels at the time of his initial complaint in 2021.
In 2019, he filed a case at France’s Council of State – its highest administrative court – alleging “climate inaction” on the part of France.
The court ruled in favour of the municipality in July 2021 but rejected a case he’d brought in his own name, leading Careme to take it to the ECHR.
The European Convention on Human Rights does not contain any explicit provision relating to the environment.
But the court has already ruled based on its Article 8 that states have an obligation to maintain a “healthy environment”, in cases relating to waste management or industrial activities.
With inputs from AFP
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
