Central Idea

On September 27, a historic legal battle in the climate action movement commenced at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.
This courtroom showdown featured 32 European governments, including the UK, Russia, and Turkey, facing off against six young individuals from Portugal, aged 11 to 24.

Why discuss this?

Youth-led climate lawsuits are reshaping climate litigation.
These lawsuits assert that uncontrolled carbon emissions infringe on fundamental rights, threaten the well-being of young generations.
This highlight the centrality of climate science in combating misinformation and denialism.

The Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and Others case was initiated in September 2020.
It was in response to the devastating wildfires in Portugal’s Leiria region in 2017, resulting in 66 casualties and the loss of 20,000 hectares of forests.
This legal action highlights the urgency of adhering to the Paris Agreement’s target of limiting global warming to below 1.5°C.

The Portuguese youths assert that European nations have failed to meet climate emissions goals, exceeding global carbon budgets compatible with the Paris Agreement’s objectives.
Scientific evidence will be presented, demonstrating that if current emission trends persist, global temperatures will rise by 3°C during the plaintiffs’ lifetimes.
Such actions are alleged to breach fundamental rights protected under the European Convention on Human Rights, including the right to life, freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment, privacy, family life, and freedom from discrimination.

Rapid Emission Reduction: As these 32 countries contributed to climate catastrophes and threatened young people’s futures, the lawsuit contends that these nations must urgently intensify emissions reductions. The recommended measures include curbing fossil fuel production and addressing global supply chain sustainability.
Emissions Reduction Targets: The European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change (ESABCC) suggested that countries should aim for emissions reductions of 75% below 1990 levels, a more ambitious target than the EU’s current 55%. The lawsuit argues that European countries have overstated their carbon budgets, emphasizing the need for greater reductions.

UNICEF characterizes the climate crisis as a “child rights crisis” due to unhindered carbon emissions and extreme weather jeopardizing access to education, health, nutrition, and the future.
Research links air pollution to adverse birth outcomes and increased risks of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.
Heatwaves exacerbate mental health issues, ultimately affecting academic performance and school attendance.

Cause and Effect Denial: Many countries have dismissed any direct relationship between climate change and its impact on human health. Greece, for instance, argued that climate change effects do not directly affect human life or health, despite experiencing massive wildfires.
Portrayal as Future Fears: Governments like Portugal and Ireland have downplayed climate change concerns as “future fears,” asserting that there is no immediate risk to lives.
Policy Reversals: Some nations, like the U.K., have showcased proactive climate policies, such as a 2030 ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars. However, these policies have been reversed, raising concerns about policy consistency and legality.

The Duarte Agostinho case represents a pivotal moment in the climate action movement, with young activists challenging their governments to protect their future against the looming climate crisis.
This legal battle underscores the critical intersection of climate change and human rights, shaping a path toward increased accountability and transformative climate governance.