“Сlimate revolution” in the practice of the ECHR: question is no longer if they should, but how they should do it

Abstract

The problem of climate change worries many, which leads to the search for ways to influence the policies and measures taken by States in this area. Over the past two decades, legal issues related to climate change have been put before international justice authorities, especially in the field of human rights protection. States are not ready to transfer such a sensitive issue to the jurisdiction of international bodies, while the latter are trying to resolve the issue of the degree of their participation in this political process and maintain a balance of interests. For the first time, the European Court of Human Rights resolved the “climate” dispute in favor of the applicant, at the same time significantly modernized its environmental practice and tried to create a legal basis not only for its own use. However, this energy of the Court leads to the formation of an independent legal regime in international human rights bodies with regard to climate change mitigation and adaptation to climate change, which comes into some contradiction with the principles of international cooperation between States carried out within the framework of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992 and related documents.

References

1. Anisimov, A.P. (2015). Legal problems relating to compensation for harm caused by climate change: the experience of Russia and the USA. Matters of Russian and International Law, 10, pp. 10–29 (in Russ.).
2. Galperin, M. L. (2024). On the “green” transition and the procedural revolution: an overview of the decisions of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights of April 9, 2024 in Carême v. France (application no. 7189/21), Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and Others and 32 Others (application no. 39371/20), Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland (application no. 53600/20). International justice, vol. 14, 2, pp. 3–19 (in Russ.).
3. Danelian, A.A. and Gulyaeva, E.E. (2021). Right to healthy and favorable environment in the practice of European Court of Human Rights. International legal courier, 2, pp. 9–23 (in Russ.).
4. Solntsev, A. and Otrashevskaya, A. (2024). UN Human Rights Committee: opinion commentary on the climate change compensation case (Torres Strait Islanders Case). International justice, vol. 14, 1, pp. 3–23 (in Russ.).
5. Harris, D., O’Boyle, M. and Warbrick, K. (2016) Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. Moscow (in Russ.).
6. Talalaev, A.N. (2011) The law of international treaties. Vol. 1 General issues. Moscow (in Russ.).
7. Quirico, O. and Boumghar, M. (Eds). (2016). Climate Change and Human Rights an international and comparative law perspective. London and New York.
8. Minnerop, P. and Otto, F. (2020). Climate change and causation: joining law and climate science on the basis of formal logic. Buffalo Environmental Law Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 49–86.
9. Sands, Ph. (2003). Principles of International Environmental Law. Cambridge.