European Court of Human Rights rules climate case against British Government inadmissible
In a brief decision, three judges of the European Court of Human Rights, have ruled inadmissible a claim against the British government for failing to take practical and effective measures to tackle the climate crisis.
Three young claimants, Kobina Jerry Amokwandoh (24), Adetola Onamade (26) and Marina Xochitl Tricks (22), British citizens, who have family in Afrika and Abya Yala (the Americas, including the Caribbean and Latin America), together with the climate justice charity, Plan B, had argued that the British government’s active support for the carbon economy together with its failure to take essential measures of climate mitigation, education, adaptation and reparation, violates their rights to life and to family life.
The claimants had adduced substantial evidence relating to the British Government’s failure to conform to the principles of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, including from the Government’s own statutory Climate Change Committee (In the words of the Committee: “The targets (Britain) set are not going to be achieved by magic”; “We continue to blunder into high-carbon choices”; “UK plans have failed to prepare for even the minimum climate risks faced”. They also highlighted the City of London’s role in supporting 15% of global carbon emissions and the estimate that FTSE100 companies are driving the world towards 4˚C warming – genocide for the younger generations and the global South.
They had detailed past, present and predicted impacts on themselves and their families arising from the Government’s policies. The panel of judges, which included the UK judge, Tim Eike, failed to provide any reasoning in support of their decision beyond a statement that the case “did not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention”.
