It’s almost like this has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with politics
INSIGHT: Human Rights Laws Could Be Next Frontier for Climate Court Actions
Courtrooms across the globe have become a battleground for climate activists, nongovernmental organizations, and ordinary citizens to compel governments to combat climate change.
Climate claims raise complex questions of how authority and responsibility to deal with the climate crisis are divided between different branches of government in different jurisdictions.
The ways in which various national courts view the role of the judiciary in addressing this crisis differ significantly, as highlighted by two recent national court decisions from the Netherlands and the U.S. taking diametrically opposed approaches.
The Dutch case of Urgenda Foundation v. The Netherlands represents the most successful example of climate impact litigation to date. In 2013, the Dutch environmental group Urgenda Foundation and approximately 900 Dutch citizens sued the Netherlands alleging that the Dutch government’s failure to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions violated obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Dutch Constitution, and the Dutch Civil Code.
What’s the old saying about being careful what you wish for? If they get their agenda passed and/or enforced by courts, what we’re seeing with the worldwide economy, which has an effect on us all, right now could become the norm. Sure, most likely not as bad, but, still pretty bad, along with Government in charge of our lives. Have Warmists really thought this out?
The Urgenda decision indicates that obligations arising under international law, such as the human rights protections enshrined in the ECHR, could prove a powerful tool that national courts can use to compel governments to undertake specific action to protect against the growing climate crisis.
Even if the slight 1.5F increase over the last 170 years is caused mostly/solely by the actions of mankind, that’s no crisis. Certainly not one requiring destruction of the economy and relinquish our rights, freedom, and choice to government.
