Switzerland’s rejection of a landmark European Court of Human Rights ruling on climate change has drawn criticism from environmental and human rights groups. The government claims to have fulfilled the ruling’s requirements, but its stance has raised concerns about its commitment to human rights law and its future climate policy.
The Council of Europe is the only regional human rights system that has not yet explicitly recognized the right to a healthy environment. However, significant progress has been made in recent years, including the unanimous adoption of a UN resolution recognizing the right in 2022. 42 of the Council’s 46 member states already protect the right to a healthy environment through their national constitutions or legislation, and the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the government’s lack of action on climate change violated the rights of a group of older Swiss women. Despite these advances, there is still a lack of political will to enshrine the right to a healthy environment in the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the growing number of climate cases and the recognition of the right by the UN and other international bodies is putting pressure on the Council of Europe to take action.
A groundbreaking decision by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled in favor of a group of Swiss women who challenged their government’s inadequate emissions reductions strategy. The court found that the Swiss government had breached the women’s right to private life under the European Convention on Human Rights. This ruling has significant implications for climate litigation worldwide, including potential impacts on similar cases in New Zealand.
Rishi Sunak’s controversial Rwanda asylum bill faces a final showdown in Parliament on Monday, April 22. The House of Lords and House of Commons are expected to sit late to pass the legislation, which aims to overcome objections from the Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights.
