Guest Writer

Victoria Kline
Victoria Kline
Victoria is a third-year student at the University of Miami School of Law, Juris Doctorate Candidate 2023, Law Review Staff Editor, and soon-to-be associate at Jones Day.

European Court of Human Rights to Hear Case on Climate Change

By Victoria Kline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CherryX

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is hearing a landmark case brought forward by the Senior Women for Climate Protection Switzerland, who are suing the Swiss government (the โ€œStateโ€) for human rights violations related to climate change. Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and others v. Switzerland (โ€œKlimaSeniorinnenโ€) is one of the first climate change matters the court has taken up. On Wednesday, March 29, 2023, the ECHR held a public hearing.

History of the Case

KlimaSeniorinnen began back in 2016, ignited by a group of women called KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz, the Senior Women for Climate Protection Switzerland. The group filed suit in Swiss court against a variety of Swiss federal government bodies alleging violations of obligations set forth in the Swiss Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights (the โ€œConventionโ€). 

The heart of the suit is the Stateโ€™s shortcomings in progress being made towards the adopted Paris Agreementโ€™s goal to keep โ€œthe increase in the global average temperature to well below 2ยฐC above pre-industrial levels.โ€ The elderly plaintiffs purport that their demographic is especially vulnerable to the โ€œtemperature-related morbidity and mortalityโ€ caused by โ€œclimate change-induced excessive heat.โ€ 

On April 25, 2017, the suit was dismissed by the Federal Department of the Environment Transport, Energy and Communications for lack of standing on the prongs of injury and remedy. Over a year later, the Swiss Federal Administrative Court rejected the plaintiffsโ€™ appeal. Subsequently, on May 20, 2020, the Swiss Supreme Court also rejected the plaintiffsโ€™ filed appeal, holding that plaintiffs should seek their desired government greenhouse gas reduction politically instead of judicially. 

After exhausting their judicial remedies at their national level, the instant plaintiffs then applied for their case to be heard by the ECHR on November 26, 2020. 

International Appeal 

Plaintiffโ€™s application to the ECHR, No. 53600/20, was granted to be heard with priority pursuant to Rule 41 of the Rules of Court. The ECHR, which is based in Strasbourg, France, is a court of last resort for individuals who claim that their rights under the Convention have been violated by a member state. Because Switzerland has ratified the Convention, it will be bound to the holding of the ECHR. 

The hearing for the case, which was held on March 29, 2023, was the first climate change matter taken up by the ECHR. Parties argued in front of a 17-member Grand Chamber led by Sรญofra Oโ€™Leary of Ireland. A webcast of the proceeding was published online by the ECHR and can be found here

The hearing, which lasted less than three hours, opened with arguments from both the State and plaintiffs, before two third parties spoke, and the panel of judges asked questions. Then, both the plaintiffs and the State were given the opportunity to reply before the close of the hearing. 

During the hearing, the senior plaintiffs argued that Switzerlandโ€™s failure to take adequate measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions was a violation of their right to life and their right to respect for private and family life, as guaranteed by Articles 2 and 8 of the Convention. Their arguments are backed by scientific research showing the increasingly dire health and safety effects that global warming is having on European senior citizens. 

In contrast, the Swiss government argued that it is taking steps to address climate change, such as implementing a carbon tax and increasing the share of renewable energy in the countryโ€™s energy mix. However, it can only do so much as one state amongst many that are contributing to the emitted greenhouse gasses that are exacerbating climate change.

What to Watch For

Now that the hearing of the case is complete, the Grand Chamber has begun private deliberations on the matter. It is unknown exactly when the ECHR will issue its ruling. 

The ECHRโ€™s decision could provide insight on how to establish standing for particularized injuries suffered as a result of climate change, which by nature affect the worldโ€™s population. Further, while the courtโ€™s holding will not be legally binding on non-member states, if the ECHR finds in favor of the seniors, it could set a precedent for other climate change lawsuits in Europe and beyond. 

Two other climate change cases are also being heard by the Grand Chamberโ€”Carรชme v. France (no. 7189/21), and Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and Others (no. 39371/20). The ECHRโ€™s handling of all three cases is expected to be closely watched by policymakers, industry members, and activists alike.