Abstract
Abstract With the European Court of Human Rights’ April 2024 decision, the climate-litigation movement might feel confident that it has demonstrated that a state’s mitigation policy is subject to human rights law. In fact, all that it has managed to do is to convince the Strasbourg court to overextend itself and discredit itself by concocting a position that defies not only law but logic. The human rights framing is too narrow for the problem of climate change. It focuses on the comfort of one particular species, ignoring the rest. Worse, it is irrelevant to the problem, as the reality of it is that each and every member of this species is causing climate change, not their governments, so the issue cannot be presented as one of protecting individuals from the power of government – and therefore not one that engages human rights law.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
