News Trending

Swiss women who won a landmark climate change ruling at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) are feeling shocked and betrayed by their parliament’s refusal to comply with the decision. These women, referred to as the “climate seniors,” had previously argued in Strasbourg, France, that the Swiss government’s inadequate response to climate change, particularly extreme heat events linked to global warming, was harming their right to health and life.

In April, the court sided with them and mandated Switzerland, which has yet to meet its greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, to take more action. The court’s rulings are binding for member states, making this decision unprecedented. Climate activists had hoped it would set a precedent for using human rights law to protect citizens from health harms caused by worsening environmental conditions.

However, on Wednesday, the Swiss parliament voted against adhering to the ECHR’s ruling, claiming Switzerland already had an effective climate strategy in place. The parliamentary debate was emotionally charged, with right-wing politicians criticizing what they saw as overreach by “foreign judges,” while Green Party members condemned the discussion as “shameful” and “populist.”

Despite Switzerland’s struggles to meet its Paris Climate Agreement goals, which aim to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, opinion polls show many Swiss are concerned about climate change. The Alpine region is particularly vulnerable, with studies indicating that its glaciers, crucial to Europe’s water supply, could vanish by the century’s end if temperatures continue to rise.

The Swiss value their direct democracy system and prefer making decisions themselves, which explains why the “foreign judges” argument resonates with them. Recently, voters supported government proposals to increase renewable electricity production, though environmental groups argue these measures are insufficient to meet climate goals. Polls show a majority of Swiss voters oppose the ECHR’s involvement, believing the country is already doing enough to protect the environment.

Other nations, particularly the United Kingdom, are closely watching Switzerland’s rejection of the ECHR ruling. The UK government has faced pushback from the Strasbourg court over its plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, leading some British voters to suggest leaving the court. However, such a move is unlikely in Switzerland, at least for now.

The final decision on whether to comply with the ECHR’s climate ruling rests with the Swiss government, which will announce its verdict in August. The ECHR did not specify what Switzerland must do, only that it must take more action. In a typical Swiss compromise, the government might present a list of measures taken since the climate seniors began their case, hoping for acceptance. If not, the climate seniors may return to court.

Picture Courtesy: Google/images are subject to copyright

News Trending

A group of elderly Swiss women have achieved a significant victory in the European Court of Human Rights, marking the first climate case success in the court’s history. These women, primarily in their 70s, emphasized their vulnerability to the impacts of heatwaves associated with climate change due to their age and gender.

The court criticized Switzerland for its insufficient efforts in meeting emission reduction goals, deeming them inadequate. This ruling holds significance as it’s the first time the court has addressed the issue of global warming.

Greta Thunberg, the Swedish activist, joined in the celebration with other activists at the court in Strasbourg. One of the leaders of the Swiss women, Rosemarie Wydler-Walti, expressed disbelief at the victory, highlighting its magnitude.

The court’s decision carries legal weight and could potentially influence legislation in 46 European countries, including the UK. It found Switzerland in breach of its duties under the Convention concerning climate change, noting deficiencies in the country’s climate policies, such as failure to quantify reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

The group of Swiss women, known as KlimaSeniorinnen or Senior Women for Climate Protection, argued that they faced health risks during heatwaves in Switzerland and were unable to leave their homes. Data showed that March of the same year marked the world’s warmest, continuing a trend of record-breaking temperatures.

However, the court dismissed similar cases brought by Portuguese youths and a former French mayor, who also claimed that European governments were not acting swiftly enough to address climate change, thus violating their rights.

Elisabeth Smart, a member of KlimaSeniorinnen at 76 years old, highlighted her lifelong observations of climate change in Switzerland, having grown up on a farm. Despite the nine-year commitment to the case, she emphasized the innate drive within some individuals to take action rather than remain passive.

While governments worldwide have committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions significantly, experts and activists warn that progress remains slow, jeopardizing efforts to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C.

Picture Courtesy: Google/images are subject to copyright