CLIMATE CHANGE UPDATE
In our January 2019 blog on the changing climate of climate change litigation, we highlighted the Dutch case brought against the Dutch government by Urgenda, in which the Hague Court of Appeal affirmed the 2015 decision of The Hague district court that the Dutch State violated its duty of care by not taking enough action to lower its CO2 emissions by 25% in 2020.
In December last year, the Supreme Court in the Hague ordered the Dutch government to reduce emissions by 15 megatonnes this year. The judges accepted Urgenda’s argument that climate change posed a dangerous threat to human rights (my italics) and the Netherlands needed to accelerate its actions to meet its international commitment of a 25% cut compared with 1990.
On Friday 24th April 2020, it was reported that to comply with the ruling, “The Dutch government has announced measures including huge cuts to coal use, garden greening and limits on livestock herds as part of its plan to lower emissions.”[1] Under these measures, coal-fired power stations will have to scale back or close completely, cattle and pig herds will be reduced, subsidies will be provided to home owners to use less concrete and more plants in their gardens, and industry will have to find alternatives for several polluting processes. This is reported as being a 75% reduction in capacity at the country’s three coal-fired power stations, all of which have been opened in the past five years. The government is also reportedly in negotiations to close one of these plants.
This is huge. “That is an enormous win,” said Marjan Minnesma, the director of Urgenda. “For many people this will give hope that it is possible to use the law as a strategic instrument for change.” “Without a doubt this should encourage climate lawsuits in other countries. It’s a shining example,” said Green party politician Tom van der Lee. “This package wouldn’t be there without an order from the highest court. Without that verdict, the government would have chosen a slower trajectory.”
This judgment is unprecedented in Europe, and I’d like to think is testament to the impact of climate litigation happening around the world. I’d also like to think that it’s a sign of the times, particularly now, that governments should get their act together on climate change and do something, rather then be dragged to court to do so.[2]
[1] The Guardian, 25th April 2020
[2] Since first writing this article, COVID-19 may, bizarrely, have helped put things in perspective; compared with the amount of money governments are shelling out (quite rightly) in response to the pandemic, a “climate” programme that would be out of whack in any other year now seems insignificant. And what about if spending that huge wad of cash addressed both mitigating COVID-19 impacts and addressed climate change? It can be done. More soon…
