by Afsana Unaz
Afsana is a Humber College student. Her acquired knowledge of the problems facing the natural environment has empowered her to learn as much as possible on being an environment-friendly individual.
From extreme weather events, to rising sea levels, there are indicators that climate change is not going away. However, it is certain that legal cases protecting the environment and holding polluters accountable are on the rise. Read on to gain insight on international cases concerning environmental issues raised and the results!
1. Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands
This case concerns the Urgenda Foundation – a Dutch environmentalist group – and 900 Dutch Citizens who sued the Dutch Government, to compel the state to do more to prevent global climate change. In its 2018 decision, the Netherlands District Court determined that the Government had a duty to take actions to mitigate climate change by limiting Greenhouse Gas (“GHG”) emissions to 25 percent below the 1990 GHG emissions rate by 2020.
Ultimately, the Dutch Government filed for appeal on 29 grounds, yet, the Hague Court of Appeal upheld the initial ruling of the District Court. The Court of Appeal found that the Government’s failure to comply with the GHG reduction mandate would be considered acting unlawfully and in contravention of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Specifically Article 2 protecting a right to life, and Article 8 protecting the right to private life, family life, home and correspondence. The Dutch Government appealed the decision to the Netherlands’ Supreme Court, but ultimately the decisions of the Hague Court of Appeal and District Court was upheld.
This case is significant as it is the first decision by any court in the world to compel its own government to strengthen its response to climate change and limiting greenhouse gas emissions, setting a new precedent for potential future climate change challenges.
2. Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan
This is a 2015 case heard at the Lahore High Court in the province of Punjab in Pakistan. Ashgar Leghari, a Pakistani farmer, sued the Pakistan government arguing that the Government failed to carry out the National Climate Change policy of 2012 and the Framework for Implementation of Climate Change of 2014 to 2030. He further argued that the Government’s failure to meet their climate adaptation targets severely impacted Pakistan’s water, food, and violated the farmer’s right to life.
The Lahore High Court ultimately ruled in favour of Leghari expressing that climate change was indeed a problem facing the world and the federal Government’s delay in implementing its policies did affect the citizens’ rights. Furthermore, to ensure that the Policy and Framework for Implementation were executed, the Court directed government ministries to nominate a “climate change focal person” to present a list of action points and the Court created a Climate Change Commission to monitor the government’s progress on implementing its climate change goals.
3. Future Generations v. Ministry of the Environment and Others
“Demanda Generaciones Futuras v. Minambiente”
This is a 2018 case heard in the Supreme Court of Justice in Colombia in which 25 youth plaintiffs between the ages of 7 to 26 years old sued the Colombian government, Colombian municipalities and other corporations. The plaintiffs argue that their fundamental rights to a healthy environment, life, good health, food and water were threatened as a result of climate change and the Government’s failure to reduce deforestation including complying with a target for zero-net deforestation in the Colombian Amazon by 2020. Additionally, the plaintiffs’ filed a ‘acciόn de tutela‘, which is a mechanism individuals can use before judicial authorities to claim immediate protection of their fundamental rights. After being ruled against by a lower court, the plaintiffs filed an appeal in 2018. Ultimately, The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision finding that individuals fundamental rights are inherently linked to the environment and ecosystem. Furthermore, the Court determined that the government had not effectively addressed the Amazon deforestation issue.
This is often referred to as a significant landmark decision In Latin America, as it was the first climate change case to be addressed by a High Court in the region.
4. Mathur v. Canada
In a nutshell, this case is the first charter challenge against the Ontario Government for its inadequate actions taken related to climate change. In 2018, the Ontario Government reversed their greenhouse gas emission reduction target for 2020, 2030, and 2050, replacing these targets with significantly lower and weaker goals. Consequently, Greenhouse Gas Emissions were not reduced. Seven youth applicants allege that the lowered targets inadequately addressed the dangers of climate change, violating Canadians’ section seven rights to life, liberty and security of the person under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”). They also assert that the revised target violated section 15 of the Charter in relation to equality rights.
In 2020, the Ontario Government filed a motion for the applicant’s case to be dismissed, claiming that the case was incapable of being decided by a court (Justiciability). Ultimately, the Government’s motion was denied and the lawsuit was heard in 2022. Although the Applicants’ were unsuccessful in proving an infringement on their Charter rights, this case is the first decision in Ontario where a court determined that a climate lawsuit is justiciable.
It is not everyday that we hear of climate change lawsuits occurring against a government, however when they do, it is our job as citizens to listen closely as the decisions created by Courts can result in crucial precedents affecting not only the environment, but ourselves and the future generations of this world.
Humber's Office of Sustainability 