AJIL 2020/4

Authors
Publication date 10-2020
Journal American Journal of International Law
Volume | Issue number 114 | 4
Pages (from-to) 729-735
Number of pages 7
Organisations
  • Faculty of Law (FdR) - Amsterdam Center for International Law (ACIL)
Abstract
The judgment in State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda Foundation marks one of the first successful challenges to climate change policy based on a human rights treaty. In this case, the Dutch Supreme Court upheld the lower court's opinion that the Netherlands has a positive obligation under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to take reasonable and suitable measures for the prevention of climate change. Although the Supreme Court recognized that climate change is a consequence of collective human activities that cannot be solved by one state on its own, it held that the Netherlands is individually responsible for failing to do its part to counter the danger of climate change, which, as the Court affirmed, inhibits enjoyment of ECHR rights. In reaching that conclusion, the Supreme Court determined the exact level of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction that the Netherlands is required to meet to comply with its ECHR obligation, specifically, a 25 percent reduction compared to its 1990 level by the end of 2020.
Document type Case note
Note © 2020 by The American Society of International Law
Language English
Published at
https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2020.52 (Final published version)
Permalink to this page
Back