to amend the law, introducing stricter and clearer emission reduction targets for the period after 2030. The most significant development in Europe, however, came with the 2024 Grand Chamber rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which for the first time comprehensively addressed the legal issues related to anthropogenic climate change35. Among these, the case of Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland stands out. The application had been submitted by the association KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz, composed of elderly women who claimed that the Swiss government’s climate inaction endangered their health and lives, particularly due to increasingly frequent and intense heatwaves. The case’s uniqueness lies in the fact that the Grand Chamber had to deal with complex procedural and substantive issues that had never before been addressed in the Court’s jurisprudence. Procedurally, the Court had to define the criteria for establishing victim status in relation to environmental violations stemming from anthropogenic climate change, as well as clarify the scope of jurisdiction under Article 1 of the ECHR. Substantively, the decision involved an evolutionary interpretation of Articles 2 and 8 of the ECHR, particularly concerning the identification of states’ positive obligations in climate matters36. The Grand Chamber upheld the application, ruling that Article 8 of the ECHR — which protects the right to respect for private and family life — includes the right to live in a healthy and safe environment. The Court also found that states have specific positive obligations on climate change derived directly from the Convention. Notably, it recognized that environmental protection is an intrinsic component of fundamental rights protected by the ECHR, even when not expressly stated in the text. The Court grounded its evolutionary interpretation of ECHR provisions on both legal and scientific bases: on the one hand, international environmental law, particularly the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 2015 Paris Agreement; on the other, the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which were used both as scientific support to with law and justice, by executive and judicial action, also in responsibility for future generations”, available at: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_20a.html 35 ECtHR, Grand Chamber, 9 April 2024, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland, App. No. 53600/20; Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and Others, App. No. 39371/20; Carême v. France, App. No. 7189/21, available at: https://www.coe.int/it/web/portal/-/three-climate-change-rulings-from-the-europeancourt-of-human-rights 36 P. Pustorino, op. cit., p. 1922 ff. 135 THE RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==