Examining the Legal Issues Raised in the Case of Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others V Switzerland

Abstract

On April 9, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter the Court or the ECtHR) for the first time found a State Party in violation of its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. In Verein KlimaSe niorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland, the ECtHR for the first time showed that it has authority to examine whether state parties are fulfilling their human rights obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of climate change. The judgment has already created important discussions in fields of human rights and environmental and climate law. With this judgment, the number of applications both before the Court and domestic courts – is likely to increase. This article aims to thoroughly examine this landmark case. In the article, f irst, the complaints and claims of the applicants in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland are scrutinized. It is shown that the applicants designed their application by considerably focusing on the impacts of climate change on their fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights. The article then discusses the counter arguments put forward by the Swiss Government. In the Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland case, the Swiss Government rejected the applicants’ arguments by relying on very common counter arguments that we frequently observe in climate litigation (namely, a drop in the ocean argument and separation of powers argument). These arguments are analysed, along with similar arguments presented in other climate cases. Finally, the article examines the ECtHR’s responses to the Swiss Government. This f inal section of the article highlights the Court’s significant findings which importantly underline the intrinsic links between climate change and human rights.

Keywords

• ECtHR
• Climate change
• Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland
• A drop in the ocean argument
• Separation of powers argument

Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz ve Diğerleri V İsviçre Kararında Öne Çıkan Hukuki Meselelerin İncelenmesi

Abstract

9 Nisan 2024 tarihinde Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi (kısaca Mahkeme veya AİHM) tarihi bir karara imza atmış ve tarihinde ilk kez iklim değişikliği alanında bir ihlal kararı vermiştir. İsviçre’ye karşı açılmış olan Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz ve Diğerleri kararıyla birlikte Mahkeme, iklim değişikliği konusunda devletlerin kendilerine düşen yükümlülükleri yerine getirip getirmediklerini denetleme noktasında yetkili olduğunu göstermiştir. Karar gerek insan hakları alanında gerekse çevre ve iklim hukuku alanında büyük bir yankı uyandırmıştır. Karar, hem AİHM önüne hem de ulusal mahkemeler önüne iklim değişikliği alanında çok sayıda başvurunun gelmesine zemin hazırlayacaktır. Eldeki çalışma Mahkeme’nin tarihinde bir dönüm noktası olan bu davayı detaylı bir şekilde incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada ilk olarak Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz ve Diğerleri davasında başvuru sahiplerinin şikâyetleri ve mağduriyet iddiaları incelenmiştir. Başvuru sahipleri, iklim değişikliğinin Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’nde yer alan temel hak ve özgürlüklerine etkisi üzerinden başvurularını şekillendirmişlerdir. Çalışmada daha sonra İsviçre Hükümeti’nin karşıt argümanlarına (counter arguments) yer verilecektir. İsviçre Hükümeti, bu davada, iklim davalarında sıklıkla karşımıza çıkan tezleri (okyanusta bir damla tezi ve güçler ayrılığı tezi) öne sürmüştür. Bu argümanlar, benzer argümanların öne sürüldüğü farklı iklim davaları ile birlikte, detaylı bir şekilde analiz edilecektir. Çalışmada son olarak, AİHM’in İsviçre Hükümeti’nin karşıt argümanlarına yönelik değerlendirmeleri incelenmiştir. Mahkeme’nin karardaki bu önemli değerlendirmeleri, iklim değişikliğinin insan haklarını çok yakından ilgilendiren bir problem olduğunu açık bir şekilde tespit etmektedir.

Keywords

• AİHM
• İklim değişikliği
• Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz ve Diğerleri v. İsviçre
• Okyanusta bir damla tezi
• Güçler ayrılığı tezi

References

1. Arnardóttir OM, ‘Vulnerability under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights: Innovation or Business as Usual’ (2017) 4(3) Oslo Law Review 150. google scholar
2. Arntz S ve Krommendijk J, ‘Historic and Unprecedented’, Verfassungsblog (9 Nisan 2024) < https://verfassungsblog.de/historic-and-unprecedented/ > Erişim Tarihi 8 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
3. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi, 4 Kasım 1950, < https://70.coe.int/pdf/convention_eng.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 6 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
4. Banda ML, Climate Science in the Courts: A Review of US and International Judicial Pronouncements (Environmental Law Institute 2020). google scholar
5. Birleşmiş Milletler İklim Değişikliği Çerçeve Sözleşmesi (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change - UNFCC), 1992 < https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 10 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
6. Bodansky D, ‘The Role of the International Court of Justice in Addressing Climate Change: Some Preliminary Reflections’ (2017) 49 Arizona State Law Journal 689. google scholar
7. Borràs S, ‘New Transitions from Human Rights to the Environment to the Rights of the Nature’ (2016) 5(1) Transnational Environmental Law 113. google scholar
8. Bošnjak M ve Zajac K, ‘Judicial Activism and Judge-Made Law at the ECtHR’ (2023) 23 Human Rights Law Review 1. google scholar

9. Buyse A ve Istrefi K, ‘Climate Cases Decided Today: Small Step or Huge Leap?’ ECHR Blog (9 Nisan 2024) < https://www.echrblog.com/ 2024/04/climate-cases-decided-today-small-step.html > Erişim Tarihi 9 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
10. Campbell R ve diğerleri, ‘Exploring the Nexus between Climate Change and Human Rights’, Working Paper No. 345, CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security. google scholar
11. Carolan E, ‘Balance of Powers’ in Anthony F. Lang ve Antje Wiener (eds) Handbook on Global Constitutionalism (Edward Elgar 2017) 212-221. google scholar
12. Cattilaz G, ‘The KlimaSeniorinnen Case, the ECtHR and the Question of Access to Court in Climate Change Cases’ (2024) 31 Reports and Essays on Climate Change Litigation 79. google scholar
13. Colby H ve diğerleri, ‘Judging Climate Change: The Role of the Judiciary in the Fight Against Climate Change’ (2020) 7(3) Oslo Law Review 168. google scholar
14. Devletlerin Uluslararası Haksız Eylemlerden Doğan Sorumluluğuna İlişkin Taslak Maddeler (Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts), 2001, < https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_6_2001.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 11 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
15. Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol, Annex B < https://unfccc.int/files/kyoto_protocol/application/pdf/kp_doha_amendment_ english.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
16. Farge E, ‘Swiss Parliament Snubs European Court Climate Ruling’, Reuters, 12 Haziran 2024, < https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ swiss-parliament-considers-snubbing-european-court-climate-ruling-2024-06-12/ > Erişim Tarihi 5 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
17. Foster CE, ‘New Clothes for the Emperor? Consultation of Experts by the International Court of Justice’ (2014) 5(1) Journal of International Dispute Settlement 139. google scholar
18. Fraser J ve Henderson L, ‘The Human Rights Turn in Climate Change Litigation and Responsibilities of Legal Professionals’ (2022) 40(1) Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 3. google scholar
19. Heri C, ‘Strasbourg’s “Case of the Century” – Revolutionary Climate Judgment from the European Court of Human Rights’, Just Security (10 Nisan 2024) < https://www.justsecurity.org/94489/revolutionary-climate-judgment/ > Erişim Tarihi 5 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
20. Hohnerlein J, ‘Who is Afraid of Actio Popularis’ Verfassungsblog (26 Nisan 2024) < https://verfassungsblog.de/who-is-afraid-of-actio-popularis/ > Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
21. Kabul Edilebilirlik Kriterleri Hakkında Pratik Kılavuz, 31 Ağustos 2023, < https://prd-echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Admissibility_ guide_ENG > Erişim Tarihi 6 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
22. Letsas G, ‘Did the Court in KlimaSeniorinnen Create an Actio Popularis?’ EJIL:Talk! (13 Mayıs 2024) < https://www.ejiltalk.org/did-the-court-in-klimaseniorinnen-create-an-actio-popularis/ > Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
23. Mayer B, ‘The Contribution of Urgenda to the Mitigation of Climate Change’ (2023) 35(2) Journal of Environmental Law 167. google scholar
24. McInerney-Lankford S, ‘Climate Change and Human Rights: An Introduction to Legal Issues’ (2009) 33 Harvard Environmental Law Review 431. google scholar
25. Milanović M, ‘A Quick Take on the European Court’s Climate Change Judgments’, EJIL:Talk! (9 Nisan 2024) < https://www.ejiltalk.org/a-quick-take-on-the-european-courts-climate-change-judgments/ > Erişim Tarihi 6 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
26. Paris Agreement, 2015 < https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
27. Rees WE, ‘Economic Development and Environmental Protection: An Ecological Economic Perspective’ (2003) 86(1-2) Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 29. google scholar
28. Setzer J ve Bangalore M, ‘Regulating Climate Change in the Courts’ in Alina Averchenkova ve diğerleri (eds), Trends in Climate Change Legislation (Edward Elgar 2017). google scholar
29. Skjærseth JB ve Wettestad J, ‘Fixing the EU Emissions Trading System? Understanding the Post-2012 Changes’ (2010) 10(4) Global Environmental Politics 101. google scholar
30. Spahn A, ‘“The First Generation to End Poverty and the Last to Save the Planet?” Individualism, Human Rights and the Value of Nature in the Ethics of Global Sustainable Development’ (2018) 10(6) Sustainability 1853. google scholar
31. Tulkens F, ‘Judicial Activism v Judicial Restraint: Practical Experience of This (False) Dilemma at the European Court of Human Rights’ (2022) 3(3) European Convention on Human Rights Law Review 293. google scholar
32. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1992 < https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_ publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
33. Vanhala L, ‘The Comparative Politics of Courts and Climate Change’ (2013) 22(3) Environmental Politics 447. google scholar
34. Zahar A, ‘The Limits of Human Rights Law: A Reply to Corina Heri’ (2022) 33(3) European Journal of International Law 953 google scholar
35. Davalar/Cases google scholar
36. Animal Defenders International v UK App no 48876/08 (ECHR, 22 April 2013). google scholar
37. Bursa Barosu Başkanlığı and Others v Türkiye App no 25680/05 (ECHR, 19 June 2018). google scholar
38. Cangı and Others v Türkiye App no 48173/18 (ECHR, 8 April 2024). google scholar
39. Case of Centre for Legal Resources on Behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v Romania App no 47848/08 (ECHR, 17 July 2014). google scholar Dudgeon v UK App no 7525/76 (ECHR, 22 October 1981). google scholar
40. Friends of the Irish Environment v Ireland (High Court, 31 July 2020) paragraf 62 < https://climatecasechart.com/wp-content/uploads/ non-us-case-documents/2019/20190919_2017-No.-793-JR_judgment-2.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
41. Howald Moor and Others v Switzerland App no 52067/10 and 41072/11 (ECHR, 11 March 2014). google scholar
42. Klass and Others v Germany App no 5029/71 (ECHR, 6 September 1978). google scholar
43. L’Érablière asbl v Belgium App no 49230/07 (ECHR, 24 February 2009). google scholar
44. Müllner v Austria App no 18859/21 (ECHR, 1 July 2024, Press Release) < https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/? library=ECHR&id=003-7987364-11142961&filename=Notification%20to%20Government%20of%20the%20M%C3%BCllner%20v.%20 Austria%20application%20concerning%20the%20environment%20.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 5 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
45. Stichting Urgenda v the State of the Netherlands App no 19/00135 (Supreme Court, 20 December 2019) < https://climatecasechart.com/ wp-content/uploads/non-us-case-documents/2020/20200113_2015-HAZA-C0900456689_judgment.pdf > Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
46. TMMOB and Karakuş Candan v Türkiye App no 46514/15 (ECHR, 4 July 2024). google scholar
47. Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland App no 53600/20 (ECHR, 9 April 2024). google scholar
48. Vides Aizsardzības Klubs v Latvia App no 57829/00 (ECHR, 27 May 2004). google scholar
49. Vilnes and Others v Norway App no 52806/09 and 22703/10 (ECHR, 24 March 2014). google scholar