Abstract

The purpose of the article is to analyse if bringing a case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) could be impactful in forcing greater climate change action. Part of this analysis is built upon the review of two climate change cases brought before national courts, since they have different outcomes even though both use the fundamental human rights of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as their legal bases. The cases are the Urgenda Foundation v. Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Union of Swiss Senior Women for Climate Protection v. Swiss Federal Council and Others. The Urgenda case establishes a link between the rights in article 2 and 8 ECHR, and climate change, which creates a positive obligation for a state to protect these rights by acting to combat climate change. The Swiss Climate Protection case, however, is dismissed. Both cases highlight some of the challenges regarding climate change in relation to the fundamental human rights of the ECHR.Judgments by the ECtHR are final, and the formally and informally binding nature of case law from the court is argued to indicate the possibility of a powerful tool in relation to climate change action since 47 states will be affected by the court’s decisions. However, if a case brought before the ECtHR has an unfavourable outcome in relation to forcing greater governmental action in combating climate change, this may also have greater consequences than such an outcome of a domestic challenge, since it will set a minimum standard of care, or completely exclude climate change in relation to human rights. The article argues that it should be considered worth the identified risks to bring a claim before the ECtHR even though it is uncertain if the evolving nature of the charter is ready to establish obligations in relation to climate change, due to the unprecedented and severe threat that climate change constitutes.

中文翻译：

---

气候变化诉讼与欧洲人权法院-下一步是否具有战略意义？

摘要

本文的目的是分析在欧洲人权法院（ECtHR）提起诉讼是否可能对强制采取更大的气候变化行动产生影响。这个分析的一部分后的国家法院带来了两款气候变化案件的审查而建，因为他们有不同的结果，即使都使用的基本人权欧洲人权公约（ECHR）作为他们的法律基础。这些案件是Urgenda基金会诉荷兰王国案和瑞士高级妇女保护气候联盟诉瑞士联邦委员会案及其他案。该Urgenda情况下建立第2和8的权利之间的联系欧洲人权公约以及气候变化，这为国家通过采取行动应对气候变化创造了保护这些权利的积极义务。在瑞士的气候保护但是，此案被驳回。这两个案例都凸显了与ECHR基本人权有关的气候变化方面的一些挑战.ECtHR的判决是终局判决，法院判例法具有正式和非正式约束力的性质被认为表明了强有力的可能性。与气候变化行动相关的工具，因为47个州将受到法院判决的影响。但是，如果在ECtHR上提起的案件在迫使政府采取更大行动应对气候变化方面有不利的结果，那么与家庭挑战的结果相比，这也可能会产生更大的后果，因为它将设定最低的护理标准，或完全排除与人权有关的气候变化。