Portuguese youth-applicants file ground-breaking climate case with European Court of Human Rights

Katie Hill - Editor-in-Chief, My Green Pod

Home » Portugal: ‘a climate change hotspot’

Published: 3 September 2020

This Article was Written by: Katie Hill - My Green Pod

Tags , , ,

Four children and two young adults from Portugal have filed an unprecedented climate change case with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

They are asking the Court to hold 33 countries accountable for fuelling the climate crisis.

Hottest July in 90 years

The case, which is brought with the support of the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN), centres on the rising threat climate change poses to their lives and to their physical and mental wellbeing.

If successful, the 33 countries would be legally bound not only to ramp up emissions cuts, but also to tackle overseas contributions to climate change, including those of their multinational companies.

The filing of the case comes just after Portugal recorded its hottest July in 90 years. An expert report prepared for the case by Climate Analytics describes Portugal as a climate change ‘hotspot’, which is set to endure increasingly deadly heat extremes.

Four of the youth-applicants live in Leiria, one of the regions worst-hit by the devastating forest fires which killed over 120 people in 2017.

The remaining two applicants reside in Lisbon where, during a heatwave in August 2018, a new temperature record of 44ºC was set.

On the current path leading to about 3°C of warming, scientists have predicted that there will be a 30-fold increase in deaths from heatwaves in Western Europe by the period 2071-2100.

‘It terrifies me to know that the record-breaking heatwaves we have endured are only just the beginning. With so little time left to stop this, we must do everything we can to force governments to properly protect us. This is why I’m bringing this case.’

CATARINA MOTA
One of the young adults behind the case

Policies ‘too weak’ for Paris commitments

The complaint alleges that the governments being sued are categorically failing to enact the deep and urgent emissions cuts required to safeguard the futures of the youth-applicants.

Their lawyers cite the authoritative Climate Action Tracker which provides detailed ratings of countries’ emissions reduction policies.

Its ratings for the EU, the UK, Switzerland, Norway, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine – which cover the 33 countries being sued – show that their policies are too weak to meet the overall goal of the Paris Agreement.

‘Human rights arguments have been at the centre of many of the recent climate change cases brought in domestic courts in Europe. But in many of those cases the courts have upheld clearly inadequate climate change policies as being compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. One of our aims in bringing this case is to encourage domestic courts to take decisions that force European governments into taking the action needed to address the climate emergency.’

MARC WILLERS QC
Barrister, London’s Garden Court Chambers, lead counsel in the case

Climate case details

The countries being sued are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Croatia, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Turkey and Ukraine.

‘This case is being filed at a time when European governments are planning to spend billions to restore economies hit by Covid-19. If they are serious about their legal obligations to prevent climate catastrophe, they will use this money to ensure a radical and rapid transition away from fossil fuels. For the EU specifically, this means committing to a minimum 65% emissions reduction target by 2030. There is no true recovery if it is not a green recovery.’

GERRY LISTON
Legal Officer with GLAN

This case focuses on two main areas: how States contribute to global emissions inside and outside their borders. Regarding emissions released at home, European governments’ reduction efforts are too weak and not in line with what the science demands.

Regarding emissions released outside their borders, it is argued that States must take responsibility for emissions relating to 1) fossil fuels which they export, 2) the production of goods which they import from abroad and 3) the overseas activities of multinationals headquartered within their jurisdictions.

Here's More
Related Content 👇

More Ethical
News & Features