The climate crisis before regional human rights courts: comparative perspectives from Europe

Abstract

Several key challenges and questions concerning the climate crisis remain in international human rights law without definite answers; despite the uncontested fact that the climate emergency is caused by human activity/state action and gives rise to always more serious human rights violations. These include the attribution of harm, the extraterritorial application of human rights obligations, damages and reparation or the identification of rights-holders. Against this backdrop, this paper argues that a comparative approach with a specific focus on the Inter-American and European human rights systems offers important guidance for addressing these gaps. Of key interest are the Inter-American Court’s Advisory Opinion AO-32/25 Climate Emergency and Human Rights and the KlimaSeniorinnen judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. Both provide valuable insights on most of the above questions and have the potential to influence the evolution of climate litigation. Thus, despite notable substantive and procedural differences between both, the European and the Inter-American human rights systems, this emerging jurisprudence contributes meaningfully to clarifying States’ obligations in the context of the climate crisis. A solid understanding of the European human rights system, especially the European Court of Human Rights, is therefore essential to fully appreciate the potential of the Inter-American approach.