Prompted by wildfires in 2017, six Portuguese youths bring 32 countries to the European Court of Human Rights for failure to respond to the climate crisis. They consider their physical and mental health to be suffering from climate change. A “David and Goliath” case.
Six Portuguese youths brought 32 countries to the European Court of Human Rights for failure to respond to the climate crisis.
Their actions were prompted by a series of wildfires in 2017 that affected multiple areas of Portugal. The case is being brought against all 27 European Union member states, as well as Norway, Russia, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.
The applicants argue that these countries are not doing enough to combat the increasing threats of the climate crisis. The applicants cite violations of human rights under Articles 2, 8, and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protect the right to life, right to privacy, and right to not experience discrimination.
The hearing opened in Strasbourg, France, at the ECHR on September 27. The Portuguese applicants, ages 11 to 24, are making the argument that their physical and mental health is already suffering from climate change. The heat waves of recent years have made it difficult for them to sleep, exercise or concentrate.
Three of the young applicants suffer from respiratory conditions and four of the six suffer from health conditions sensitive to pollution and allergens.
They will argue the evidence that an increase of just one degree Celsius in average temperatures would lead to a 1.7% increase in respiratory sickness in Portugal. As well as that climate change will expose people in Portugal to higher levels of pollution and potentially increase levels of allergens that exacerbate respiratory diseases such as asthma.
The proceedings, supported by the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN), a non-profit organization in Ireland and England, are centered on a claim that European governments have failed to take appropriate actions to tackle climate change.
The emissions of greenhouse gases by all these countries are also contributing to the warming of the planet. The applicants assert that there is indisputable evidence in relation to the climate crisis, and firmer steps need to be taken to counter the continuous threat of further global warming as it is a human rights issue.
Dr Gearóid Ó Cuinn, one of two Irish lawyers representing the young people and the founding director of GLAN, described it as a “David and Goliath case” for the climate. “It also makes legal history. Never before have so many countries had to defend themselves in front of any court anywhere in the world.”
Catarina dos Santos Mota, 23, who is part of the group of six young Portuguese people who filed the complaint, said “since we started this case we have felt the impact of the climate crisis getting worse and worse, especially the heat. In 2023, July was the hottest month on record. It’s scary to think that this is just the beginning and that it’s only going to get hotter.” Ms. Mota hopes that the court can come to a decision regarding this case within six to twelve months. At times, it can take the EHCR more than three years to make a decision, depending on the case.
The European Climate Action Network is one of the parties that presented arguments to the court in support of the applicants. One of the main arguments they presented is the fact that governments need “to rapidly reduce emissions and limit the increase in global temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels,” as was established in the 2015 Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change.
The 32 governments will attempt to argue that the applicants have not proven their actions, or lack of, personally impacted them.
They will also aim to discredit some of the evidence presented by the applicants and argue that this issue falls outside the jurisdiction of the ECHR. Twenty-two judges will consider the case.
If they were to make a ruling, it would become legally binding, demanding that the countries in question urgently act on finding stronger implementations and climate crisis regulations, which can include reducing fossil fuel emissions and building renewable infrastructure.
