In 2020, a group of Swiss women lodged a claim stating Switzerland was violating their rights by contributing to climate change-induced heat waves threat to their health and well-being. In an interesting turn of events, on April 9, the European Court of Human Rights agreed with their complaint in the case Klimaseniorinnen v. Switzerland. Notably, the court dismissed two other climate cases due to procedural issues, one brought by a former French mayor and another by six Portuguese youth.
The Klimaseniorinnen ruling adds more clarity to human rights-based obligations for climate action. It establishes a more solid platform for the Paris Agreement’s target of restricting the rise in global average surface temperatures to 1.5°C by emphasizing a previously endorsed pledge.
The ruling’s weight lies in a two-part function. Foremost, it added enforceable muscle to the previously aspirational 1.5°C climate action target. Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, nearly every country in the world agreed to keep global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. However, this commitment was non-binding. The Klimaseniorinnen decision imparted enforcement to this target, attesting that Switzerland’s efforts towards achieving it have been insufficient under European human rights law. The court now demands that Switzerland take immediate action and establish intermediate greenhouse gas reduction goals convergent with the international efforts aim to limit global warming to 1.5°C.
In addition, the verdict has emphasized the legal accountability of governments in addressing the climate crisis. Legal entities worldwide will look to this ruling to understand the responsibilities of their own governments.
Furthermore, citizens’ lawsuits against their governments over failure to ensure a stable climate necessary for survival are becoming increasingly popular in domestic courts globally, with cases seeing success in countries varying from Colombia to Germany to Pakistan.
The verdict from Klimaseniorinnen v. Switzerland is expected to further encourage legal actions against governments for their climate responsibilities. Along with legal precedents, rights-based climate cases are inspiring both new and ongoing judicial advocacy approaches on both domestic and international fronts.