Page 47
Legal
From Megaphones to Magistrates: Climate Activism is Turning to the Courtroom By Eoin Gormley, JS Law and Political Science Symbols associated with climate activism might include banners and placards as the visibility of environmental NGOs has come primarily in the form of mass street protests. However, case files and judge’s mallets are becoming equally synonymous with environmental lobby groups in recent years as many have been taking to the world’s courtrooms to demand better climate policy making from their governments. Climate-related court cases are certainly not alien to the legal system. More localised cases such as tort proceedings pertaining to pollution and environmental damage have been commonplace in both civil and common law jurisdictions for quite some time. So too have more high-profile cases against large corporations- negligent as to the adverse impact of their operations on the planet. However, climate cases of a novel nature have been making their way to courts across the globe. These cases involve claims taken directly against the state, seeking judicial intervention to compel governments to take better action on environmental matters. The Domino effect of Urgenda Many credit the Dutch Climate NGO Urgenda as being the catalyst for this new type of environmental activism. Netherlands v Urgenda Foundation was first heard in 2013 by a district court in the Hague, and later heard by the country’s Supreme Court on appeal by the Dutch government. Due to the monist legal system in the Netherlands, under which its domestic and constitutional law remains subordinate to binding international law, Urgenda was able to take their government to court based on unfulfilled international legal obligations. They argued that the Dutch government was not doing enough to reduce its carbon emissions, therefore violating its international obligations as laid out in Annex I of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In both instances, the NGO’s claim was upheld. The court gave precise orders to the Dutch Government to cut its emissions by at least twenty five per cent within five years, as was asked of them in the UN Framework, instead of the seventeen per cent reduction that the government planned to make. The judgment was described as a “landmark ruling” by James Thornton of Client Earth who predicted that the Dutch Court’s reasoning “will certainly be used by courts in other countries.” Thorton was proved right as climate activists across the globe followed Urgenda’s lead by taking on their own governments in court. According to the United Nations 2020 Global Climate Litigation report, the amount of climate cases across the globe has nearly doubled since 2017, with annual cases increasing from 884 to 1550. Many of these cases were high-profile victories for environmental NGOs, as activists from countries including the UK, South Africa, and Norway have successfully influenced their Government’s climate policies on the back of successful litigation. For example, as recently as February of this year, the Administrative Court of Paris found the French state guilty of “non-respect of its engagements” aimed at combating global warming, after a group of climate NGOs brought a challenge against the Government on the matter in Notre Affaire à Tous and Others v France. One of the most high-profile post-Urgenda cases was taken in Ireland by a group of climate activists who became the second NGO in the world to successfully challenge government climate policy in the highest court in the land. Friends of the Irish Environment v Government of Ireland (known also as “Climate Case Ireland”) was decided
