Open Access
Mixed signals for domestic climate law : the climate rulings of the European Court of Human Rights
Loading...
Files
Verf_Mixed_signals_2024.pdf (134.35 KB)
Full-text in Open Access, Published version
License
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
2366-7044
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
Verfassungsdebate, 2024, The transformation of European climate litigation, OnlineOnly
Cite
ABEL, Patrick, Mixed signals for domestic climate law : the climate rulings of the European Court of Human Rights, Verfassungsdebate, 2024, The transformation of European climate litigation, OnlineOnly - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/77265
Abstract
The climate rulings of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are landmark decisions. However, it is not obvious what they mean precisely for the State parties of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Have we witnessed, in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz, a landslide victory for the activists that will revolutionize domestic climate law? Or do the two other decisions in which the Grand Chamber dismissed the applications preponderate? Milanović has rightly pointed out that the judgment in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz is “very sophisticated.” All three rulings contain passages that forcefully advocate climate action and a prominent role of the ECHR therein. Other paragraphs defend the sovereignty of states and the margin of appreciation for democratic decision-making. Overall, the rulings send mixed signals. This is not unusual for Grand Chamber rulings that were reached almost unanimously. They reflect a compromise among the judges. In this blog post, I will unpack the consequences of the three rulings for the domestic climate policies of the ECHR parties.
Table of Contents
Additional Information
Published online: 17 April 2024
This article belongs to the debate 'The transformation of European climate litigation'. In a transformative moment for European and global climate litigation, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled for the first time in its history that inadequate climate mitigation measures violate human rights. The implications are far-reaching, both in Europe and beyond. This joint blog debate with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law assesses the Court’s climate judgments from April 9 and discusses the implications for climate protection and climate litigation.
This article belongs to the debate 'The transformation of European climate litigation'. In a transformative moment for European and global climate litigation, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled for the first time in its history that inadequate climate mitigation measures violate human rights. The implications are far-reaching, both in Europe and beyond. This joint blog debate with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law assesses the Court’s climate judgments from April 9 and discusses the implications for climate protection and climate litigation.