Oxfam: European Court of Human Rights provides a partial step forward for climate protection but a step back on international accountability

In response to the decision by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the Grand Chamber’s first-ever climate-related cases (Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland, Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and Others, and Carême v. France), Evelien van Roemburg, Head of Oxfam’s European Union office said: 

“European judges have ruled that a government’s failure to do enough to reduce national greenhouse gas emissions violates its population’s human rights. This is a positive step and allows people to require their governments to put in place effective climate regulations and carbon budgets. But the judges did not challenge Switzerland’s decision to give itself almost three more decades to reach net zero emissions, even though people around the world are being harmed now by the climate crisis.”   

“The European Court of Human Rights also decided that Member States can’t be held accountable for the harms their emissions cause to people beyond their borders. The way the Court has interpreted the European Convention on Human Rights is out of step with the way the International Court of Justice, United Nations, Inter-American and African human rights courts and human rights treaty monitoring bodies have interpreted international human rights law. Until the European Court holds its Member States responsible when their actions harm people outside their borders, it can expect that affected communities across the world will seek to hold them to account before other international courts and mechanisms.”  

“The Court’s decision implies governments can set climate policy without considering the damages they inflict on other people —especially people living in the Global South, who have done the least to cause climate breakdown yet are facing the most punishing heat, droughts and floods. And it also implies European governments have impunity for all the harms they cause. This approach undermines the purpose of having a human rights treaty.”