A Rights Turn in Climate Change Litigation?

Jacqueline Peel, Hari M. Osofsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In 2015, a Pakistani court in the case of Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan made history by accepting arguments that governmental failures to address climate change adequately violated petitioners' rights. This case forms part of an emerging body of pending or decided climate change-related lawsuits that incorporate rights-based arguments in several countries, including the Netherlands, the Philippines, Austria, South Africa, and the United States (US). These decisions align with efforts to recognize the human rights dimensions of climate change, which received important endorsement in the Paris Agreement. The decisions also represent a significant milestone in climate change litigation. Although there have been hundreds of climate-based cases around the world over the past two decades - especially in the US - past and much of the ongoing litigation focuses primarily on statutory interpretation avenues. Previous efforts to bring human rights cases have also failed to achieve formal success. The new cases demonstrate an increasing trend for petitioners to employ rights claims in climate change lawsuits, as well as a growing receptivity of courts to this framing. This 'rights turn' could serve as a model or inspiration for rights-based litigation in other jurisdictions, especially those with similarly structured law and court access.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)37-67
Number of pages31
JournalTransnational Environmental Law
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2018

Fingerprint

climate change
lawsuit
human rights
federation
Austria
Philippines
Pakistan
jurisdiction
Netherlands
rights
litigation
climate
interpretation
Law
trend
history
court
decision

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
  • Law

Cite this

@article{fb844a16403841a5a241170a0893d4b4,
title = "A Rights Turn in Climate Change Litigation?",
abstract = "In 2015, a Pakistani court in the case of Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan made history by accepting arguments that governmental failures to address climate change adequately violated petitioners' rights. This case forms part of an emerging body of pending or decided climate change-related lawsuits that incorporate rights-based arguments in several countries, including the Netherlands, the Philippines, Austria, South Africa, and the United States (US). These decisions align with efforts to recognize the human rights dimensions of climate change, which received important endorsement in the Paris Agreement. The decisions also represent a significant milestone in climate change litigation. Although there have been hundreds of climate-based cases around the world over the past two decades - especially in the US - past and much of the ongoing litigation focuses primarily on statutory interpretation avenues. Previous efforts to bring human rights cases have also failed to achieve formal success. The new cases demonstrate an increasing trend for petitioners to employ rights claims in climate change lawsuits, as well as a growing receptivity of courts to this framing. This 'rights turn' could serve as a model or inspiration for rights-based litigation in other jurisdictions, especially those with similarly structured law and court access.",
author = "Jacqueline Peel and Osofsky, {Hari M.}",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S2047102517000292",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "37--67",
journal = "Transnational Environmental Law",
issn = "2047-1025",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

A Rights Turn in Climate Change Litigation? / Peel, Jacqueline; Osofsky, Hari M.

In: Transnational Environmental Law, Vol. 7, No. 1, 01.03.2018, p. 37-67.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Rights Turn in Climate Change Litigation?

AU - Peel, Jacqueline

AU - Osofsky, Hari M.

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - In 2015, a Pakistani court in the case of Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan made history by accepting arguments that governmental failures to address climate change adequately violated petitioners' rights. This case forms part of an emerging body of pending or decided climate change-related lawsuits that incorporate rights-based arguments in several countries, including the Netherlands, the Philippines, Austria, South Africa, and the United States (US). These decisions align with efforts to recognize the human rights dimensions of climate change, which received important endorsement in the Paris Agreement. The decisions also represent a significant milestone in climate change litigation. Although there have been hundreds of climate-based cases around the world over the past two decades - especially in the US - past and much of the ongoing litigation focuses primarily on statutory interpretation avenues. Previous efforts to bring human rights cases have also failed to achieve formal success. The new cases demonstrate an increasing trend for petitioners to employ rights claims in climate change lawsuits, as well as a growing receptivity of courts to this framing. This 'rights turn' could serve as a model or inspiration for rights-based litigation in other jurisdictions, especially those with similarly structured law and court access.

AB - In 2015, a Pakistani court in the case of Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan made history by accepting arguments that governmental failures to address climate change adequately violated petitioners' rights. This case forms part of an emerging body of pending or decided climate change-related lawsuits that incorporate rights-based arguments in several countries, including the Netherlands, the Philippines, Austria, South Africa, and the United States (US). These decisions align with efforts to recognize the human rights dimensions of climate change, which received important endorsement in the Paris Agreement. The decisions also represent a significant milestone in climate change litigation. Although there have been hundreds of climate-based cases around the world over the past two decades - especially in the US - past and much of the ongoing litigation focuses primarily on statutory interpretation avenues. Previous efforts to bring human rights cases have also failed to achieve formal success. The new cases demonstrate an increasing trend for petitioners to employ rights claims in climate change lawsuits, as well as a growing receptivity of courts to this framing. This 'rights turn' could serve as a model or inspiration for rights-based litigation in other jurisdictions, especially those with similarly structured law and court access.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85039794167&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85039794167&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S2047102517000292

DO - 10.1017/S2047102517000292

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 37

EP - 67

JO - Transnational Environmental Law

JF - Transnational Environmental Law

SN - 2047-1025

IS - 1

ER -