|
|
|
id21
viewpoints
id21 invites development
workers, activists and researchers to contribute their points of view
on development issues.
Peter
Roderick, Co-Director of the Climate Justice Programme, discusses
why litigation for climate justice should be taken up seriously.
Litigating
for climate justice
Litigation (legal action) for justice over climate change is an immense
global issue which is likely to increase in the future. The complexities
of legal systems are a disadvantage for poor communities, who often
suffer the most serious impacts of climate change. Is it worth these
people going to court over climate change?
To date, there are
about 17 different climate legal initiatives underway, in both developed
and developing countries. The most recent cases have involved human
rights issues, addressing both causes of climate change and the impacts.
Judgments have started to come through; verdicts so far are going both
ways.
Poor communities face particular difficulties in taking legal action
over climate change:
- Legal proceedings
involve language, rules and procedures that are designed, applied
and affordable by rich and privileged elites.
- Even when judges
find in favour of poor communities, big business can ignore the decision.
Gas flaring in Nigeria
has contributed more greenhouse gases (GHGs) than all other African
sources combined, according to the World Bank. On 14th November 2005,
the Federal High Court of Nigeria found in favour of Mr Jonah Gbemre
in a case put forward on behalf of himself and the Iwherekan community.
Gas flaring near the community - which also disperses toxic chemicals
over local residents and into the environment - was determined to be
a "gross violation" of the constitutionally-guaranteed rights.
Shell Nigeria and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation were ordered
to stop gas flaring at Iwherekan immediately. After 32 days, this order
had not been obeyed; contempt of court proceedings were started on 16th
December 2005. Several other gas flaring cases brought by Niger Delta
communities are pending.
On 7th December 2005,
63 Inuit people in the US and Canada submitted a petition to the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights. They wanted relief from violations of their
human rights - including the rights to retain their culture, life, food
and health - resulting from global warming caused by US GHG emissions.
The Arctic is rapidly warming, which affects Inuit life by disrupting
food supplies and transport. Yet still the USA fails to reduce its emissions
and support international efforts to tackle climate change.
There are three
justifications for enforcing laws to combat climate change:
- It increases
pressure for necessary global reductions in GHG emissions. It is vital
that the lack of government leadership is met with courage and self-respect
by victims.
- It offers the
prospect of compensation for climate change damage (although no damages
case has yet been brought). This is not a substitute for rational
policies, but the current international mechanism for compensation
is grossly inadequate.
- It is better
that disputes are settled rationally and peacefully, rather than leading
to further conflicts between countries and communities and businesses.
We should be encouraged
by the December 2005 government agreement in Montreal to start talks
about further emission reductions after 2012. However, waiting for another
six years to start taking action is not an option.
Contributor
Peter Roderick
Further information
Peter Roderick
Co-Director, Climate Justice Programme
Tel + 44 (0) 20 7388 3141
Email peterroderick@cjp.demon.co.uk
Climate Justice
March 2006
Sources
'Legal
action to stop Nigeria gas flaring', Climate Justice Programme, 2005
'Petition
to the inter American commission on human rights seeking relief from
violations resulting from global warming caused by acts and omissions
of the united states', submitted by Sheila Watt-Cloutier, with the
support of the Inuit circumpolar conference, on behalf of all Inuit
of the Arctic regions of the United States and Canada, 2005
Other climate change cases
Comment
on this viewpoint by emailing id21viewpoints@ids.ac.uk
See other
comments on this viewpoint
What's
your viewpoint?
id21 is inviting academics, practitioners, activists, decision-makers,
policy-shapers from NGOs, research institutes, governments, donor organisations
- indeed anyone involved in international development – to contribute
a short article to id21 expressing their point of view on policy issues
relating to their work. Click
here for more information.
Click
here to go back to previous id21 viewpoints
Submit
your research to id21
Send us your feedback on the latest editions of 'insights'
|
Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily
those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Unless
stated otherwise articles featured on the id21 web-site may be
copied or quoted without restriction, provided id21 and originating
author(s) and institution(s) are acknowledged.
Copyright
© 2005 IDS. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
| FREE Information
Delivery services from id21: |
 |
 |
|
id21 is enabled
by the UK Government Department for International Development (www.dfid.gov.uk) and is one of a family of knowledge
services provided by the Institute of Development Studies (www.ids.ac.uk/ids), at the University of Sussex,
UK. Charitable Company No: 877338. id21 is a oneworld.net (www.oneworld.net) partner and a mediachannel
affiliate (www.mediachannel.org). |
|