CLIMATE LITIGATION: AN INSTRUMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

Image by Vincent M.A Jansen

Introduction

Climate litigation has emerged as a significant aspect of environmental law, allowing communities to seek legal redress against governments and big corporations for their role in climate change reduction. This approach involves the use of law to frame the climate crisis and the ensuing problems to proactively determine and operationalise legal response action, squarely situating climate change cases in human rights and constitutional law. Certain arguments are increasingly being accepted by courts as valid, thereby setting precedents for future cases involving climate change in addition to providing legal grounds for the formulation of future environmental policies as well as calling corporations to account. Among these are the issues of human rights, judicial activism, and the development of legal precedent and jurisprudence, all of which attest to the rise in the application of climate litigation as a means of seeking climate justice.

i.             The Rise of Climate Lawsuits

As was aptly demonstrated in the cases of Urgenda Foundation v. Netherlands and Juliana v. United States, climate change litigation has become increasingly sought after over the years, and there have been some changes in the legal arguments being used. Litigants are now resorting to other areas of law, including tort law, human rights law, and constitutional law, in efforts to make strong legal cases for action on climate issues. The shift is indicative of the reality that climate change touches on a wide variety of dimensions relating to human life, activities, and institutional arrangements. These cases tend to gain media attention, where involving legal proceedings in matters of climate policy, corporate accountability, and intergenerational justice are highlighted. Moreover, the effective outcomes of the before mentioned cases to are likely to define standards and revise the existing laws for the reduction of green-house gases emissions and present policies for climate alterations. Evidently, they may influence the opinion of the public domain as well as exert pressure on the policymaker to take more effective steps for the change relating to climatic change circumstances.

ii.            Courts and Human Rights: A New Interpretation

Worldwide, judicial systems recognise climate change as a human rights issue, which is a dramatic change in legal thinking. This acknowledgement is based on the understanding that climate change has direct consequences on the right to life, health, and property. High-visibility court judgments in different regions have cited environmental deterioration as a cause for the infringement of human rights, thereby urging governments and the private sector to act immediately. Judicial bodies are increasingly deciding cases where governments are declared incapable of fighting climate change, usually by using the constitutional and international human rights laws to buttress their decisions. At the same time, this approach has raised questions about the extent to which the judiciary has the right to constrain climate policy, which is usually the province of legislative and executive authority. Scholars aver that these judgments may intrude on the established limits of judicial power, but others insist that the courts must secure fundamental rights in the presence of critical situations such as climate change.

iii.          Key Precedents Shaping Global Climate Justice

When the verdicts are issued as a product of legal procedures, they influence how the corporate sector and government regard climate problems. This discussion extends beyond legal and constitutional confines to cover aspects of governance and the responsibility of society. Courts are increasingly participating in the adjudication of climate cases, furthering their role from interpretation to directly influencing the course of future environmental legislation and policy. This evolving dynamic between judicial entities and the rest of the government shows both the scale of climate problems and apprehensions about how traditional governmental remedies are constrained. In addition, increased public scrutiny and fear over climate change justify the powers of courts to influence the quest for stronger climate solutions. However, with this shift, there are also apprehensions around democratic accountability, the threat of inadvertent results, when issues relating to complex policies, which require intricate and holistic decision making, are dealt with in a narrow format by judicial decisions.

iv.          The Future of Climate Litigation

Climate litigation should undergo increased innovation in issues of legal strategy, and more diverse collectives seeking justice for the consequences associated with climate change. Now that the evidence base about how specific emission sources affect climate effects has grown significantly, courts should become more receptive to causation and liability arguments. Such trends may trigger increased litigation that seeks not only to hold fossil fuel companies responsible but also industries producing vast amounts of greenhouse gases and governments that have not effectively dealt with climate issues. Moreover, the global aspects of climate change may force courts to cooperate on solved matters, transcending borders, where this cooperation, in the end, may lead to the formulation of a joint legal ground and ruling. The rise of climate litigation may have a major influence on climate policies, push for greater ambition in climate acts and fundamentally change the state of environmental laws and governance of any country.

Conclusion

Climate litigation is found to be an effective way of making governments and corporations liable for their contributions to climate change, in setting important legal precedents. Not only has the policy development been affected by these cases, but the awareness of the population about the necessity of solving public climate change problems has also increased. There is an urgent need for better legislation to support action on climate, for example, stronger environmental regulation and better enforcement. The partnership between the legal experts, policymakers and environmentalists is very important in order to capitalise on the impacts of the law in addressing climate change.


Authored by Meher Afroz Aneey, a law student at the American International University, Bangladesh.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

WOMBS FOR RENT; THE DARK SIDE OF SURROGACY

DIAMONDS IN THE DIRT: THE COST OF FREE SPEECH

NO WORKER LEFT BEHIND; RECLAIMING LABOR RIGHTS IN BANGLADESH BEYOND MAY DAY