In a recent announcement from the Council of Europe, it was stated that Switzerland has yet to demonstrate compliance with the European Court of Human Rights’ groundbreaking decision on climate change. Earlier this year, the court sided with a group of elder Swiss women, emphasizing that nations should provide stronger protection to their citizens against the impacts of climate change. Switzerland, the court argued, has failed in its obligations to effectively combat climate change and meet its emissions targets.
This ruling came six months ago, and since then, Switzerland has requested the closure of the case, asserting full compliance with the court’s demands. However, the Committee of Ministers, tasked with overseeing the enforcement of the court’s decisions, acknowledged progress but noted that Switzerland has not fulfilled all stipulated requirements.
Environmental advocates have embraced this development as a commendable triumph. Rosmarie Wydler-Wälti, co-president of Senior Women for Climate Protection and one of the plaintiffs, remarked, “The Swiss Federal Council’s arguments have not swayed the Committee of Ministers. Switzerland must enhance its climate policies to rectify the breach of our human rights.”
The organization, consisting of approximately 2,000 members with an average age of 73, contends that the rights of older women are disproportionately affected due to the increasing frequency of heat waves driven by global warming. Following a three-day discussion, the Swiss government has been instructed to offer more details on specific measures undertaken to mitigate the more acute and impending impacts of climate change within the nation, particularly in safeguarding vulnerable segments of the population.
The Committee of Ministers, encompassing foreign affairs ministers from the council’s 46 member nations, is set to reconvene in September to further deliberate on the matter.
This decision has ignited widespread debate within Switzerland, with the government arguing that the court might have exceeded its authority. Corina Heri, a specialist in climate litigation at Tilburg Law School, points out that the request for additional information is a standard part of the compliance process at the ECHR. “Nothing is final yet,” she stated.
Frustrated with what they perceive as insufficient action from elected officials regarding climate change, numerous environmental groups have resorted to legal avenues to further their cause. Notably, late last year, the International Court of Justice addressed its most extensive case to date, attending to the concerns of several small island nations grappling with the grave repercussions of climate change, which they believe threaten their existence.
The planet has experienced a temperature increase of 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 degrees Fahrenheit) since the pre-industrial era owing to fossil fuel combustion. Between 1990 and 2020, global sea levels saw an average rise of 10 centimeters (3.9 inches), with more substantial changes observed in parts of the South Pacific.
