On Tuesday, the European Court of Human Rights ruled inadmissible a case brought by six young Portuguese men trying to force 32 European governments to take more ambitious action on climate change, Reuters reports.
Andre, Katarina, Claudia, Mariana, Martim and Sofia, all born between 1999 and 2012, cited “exceptional circumstances” to support the argument that the court should have included the “extraterritorial jurisdiction” of other states.
The 17 judges, including Portugal’s Ana Maria Guerra Martins, found that the target countries have “control over public and private activities on their territory” that contribute to the production of greenhouse gases, and that there are obligations of several states, including Portugal, to reduce emissions and namely the Paris Agreement (signed in 2015 and providing for emissions reductions).
Despite this, the ECtHR considered that they could not serve as “a basis for creating a legal interpretation of a new area of extraterritorial jurisdiction or a justification for expanding existing ones.”
The court also held that the applicants had not exhausted all remedies available to them in Portugal before approaching that European authority.
The applicants argued that the process of human rights violations resulting from climate change was not subject to assessment by a body in Portugal, but the ECtHR rejected this argument, citing the lack of evidence presented to national courts for review. to the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights.
The Court interpreted that processes relating to the environment and climate change were already present in the Portuguese judicial system and were “a reality of the national legal system”, so the process had to exhaust all possible national authorities before it was brought to trial. European Court.
“The Court noted that the Portuguese legal system provides both mechanisms to overcome lack of representation. [dos requerentes] and measures to overcome the length of procedures”, the ECtHR therefore “failed to recognize the existence of special reasons for excluding applicants from an exhaustive domestic process in accordance with the applicable rules and available procedures.”
For the same reason, they consider that the data requested by the applicants to verify the status of the victim is insufficient.
However, the European Court of Human Rights has made a historic recognition: climate change is a problem that countries have an “obligation” to address and find mitigation measures for.
Author: Lusa This Catarina Correia Rocha
Source: CM Jornal
I am Michael Melvin, an experienced news writer with a passion for uncovering stories and bringing them to the public. I have been working in the news industry for over five years now, and my work has been published on multiple websites. As an author at 24 News Reporters, I cover world section of current events stories that are both informative and captivating to read.