It is easy to recognize the garbage in front of you and the fine dust that makes my throat itch as an environmental problem. On the other hand, it is difficult to feel climate change occurring over several decades. It’s bound to be controversial and the severity of the problem feels different. Recognizing that the climate crisis is depriving people of their right to live humanly, such as life, health, and labor, they chose to appeal to the law as a way to solve this problem. They hold the government and businesses accountable. What kind of judgment will you make in the realm of law? You, who awakened to the problem of human waste after Corona 19, who are demanding changes from businesses and governments through ethical consumption and meticulous separation for the global environment, may already know the answer.
‘Youth Climate Action’ Youth are holding a press conference in front of the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul on the morning of March 13 last year. They asked for a constitutional petition to confirm that the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth was unconstitutional, saying that the current legislation that passively stipulated the goal of reducing greenhouse gases violates basic rights such as the right to life and the environment of youth. By Lee Jung-ah, staff reporter [email protected]
Andrea (left) and Sofia are laughing while looking at the lawsuit filed in the European Human Rights Court last September. Brother and sister
“I don’t know if we will win the lawsuit. Whether we win or lose, the young people of this world will no longer accept that our destiny has been determined as it is. The fact that the court accepted this case as an emergency and responded quickly feels like an acknowledgment of this case.” (Sophia) “It’s going really fast right now. The more people know about this event, and the more pressure our generation puts on this issue, the more likely we are to succeed. Even if this lawsuit is lost, new cases will be flooded.” (Andre) The Portuguese brothers and sisters Sofia (16) and Andre (13) are conducting climate lawsuits against 33 European countries that have participated in the Paris Climate Change Convention. Six youths, including brothers and sisters, received a decision from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, in December last year, three months after filing a lawsuit, saying that they qualify as plaintiffs. The courts were presented with each country’s GHG reduction plans. As the youth argued, it is looking into whether the governments of 33 countries are threatening the right to live by the governments of 33 countries. Conducted an e-mail interview with them shortly after the decision of the European Court of Human Rights came out.
Andrea and Sophia brother and sister. Brother and sister
Sophia and Andre cited fear as a reason for filing the lawsuit. The brothers and sisters live in Lisbon, where the temperature rose to 44 degrees due to the 2018 heatwave. The remaining four plaintiffs are from a forest fire-affected area (Leiria), where more than 120 people died in Portugal. “Last year, I went to the forest in the summer, and it came to my mind that if there was a forest fire, we would all be trapped.” In June and September 2017, forest fires struck Leiria in central Portugal, where the hot and dry weather persisted. Many of the residents died in the worst wildfires that the Portuguese government had to do and seek help from the European Union. The brothers and sisters said, “The adults reassured us, and we tried to forget the fear, but the pine forest fire is still a ghost torment us.” “Our lawsuit is about the rights of young people and generations to come. But it’s not about us versus you, it’s about intergenerational solidarity.” They raised 43 million won through crowdfunding from citizens as a cost of litigation from “to overcome global problems together and become a better society”. Sophia said, “The home we want to rebuild (with this money) is the Earth.”
European Court of Human Rights. Gifu Media Hub
The fight against those whose climate crisis became a reality has already begun. Climate lawsuits are ongoing against governments and businesses around the world. The same goes for Korea, the 9th largest greenhouse gas emitter in the world as of 2019. Lee Yoo-jin, a researcher at the Green Transformation Research Institute (special adviser for the Prime Minister’s Green New Deal), said he felt the changes in questions in recent years. “There is an increasing number of youth, office workers, and local people who think that all environmental issues such as energy, food, waste, and biodiversity are linked to the climate crisis. Just a few years ago, there were many citizens asking what we should do. Since last year, the question of what to do is increasing, although it cannot be done by individual practice alone. Citizens are beginning to recognize that it is unjust to ask only citizens to do it without the government doing its job.” A climate lawsuit against the Korean government began in March last year by an environmental group Youth Climate Action. 19 youths of the same age as Sofia and Andre of Portugal, who filed a climate lawsuit with the European Court of Human Rights, appeared as plaintiffs. Influenced by Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg, youth and others have even been sued after protesting from school. The respondent is the Korean National Assembly and the government. The youth said that while the government and the National Assembly acknowledged the fatal risk of climate change, related legislation did not set higher GHG reduction targets. As a result of the government’s inadequate response, he said that when he became an adult, he would suffer irreparable damage from climate change, which violates basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as the right to life, the right to pursue happiness, and the right to live a human life. Last September, the National Assembly passed a resolution calling for emergency response to the climate crisis, and in October, President Moon Jae-in’s declaration of carbon neutrality in 2050 was issued. The roadmap for the Green New Deal is pouring out, but he is hesitant to advance the GHG reduction target. The juveniles who filed the lawsuit and the lawyers representing them plan to issue a criticism of the’no government effort’ to the Constitutional Court sooner or later.
In October last year, the government submitted a written opinion of about 600 pages to the Constitutional Court. △There is no legislative obligation on the GHG reduction target in the Constitution △Because the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth was enacted in 2010, the period for filing a lawsuit (90 days) has passed, and △It is the government that is subject to the relevant laws and not the people The youth said they did not meet the legal requirements for the party to the lawsuit. The government said that even if it was a legitimate lawsuit, the previous government set reduction targets and detailed plans through expert analysis and public opinion gathering procedures, and fulfilled its responsibilities as a party to the Paris Climate Change Agreement. It also refuted that foreign climate litigation, such as the ruling of the Dutch Supreme Court, which forced the government to reduce efforts, cannot be compared directly because circumstances are different from country to country. According to a paper on climate change and constitutional litigation presented by Jaehee Lee, senior researcher at the Constitutional Court of Korea at the Korean Legal Entrepreneur’s Conference in October last year, “The real danger of climate change, the level of reduction agreed by the international community, is a violation of the state’s obligation to protect basic rights It is necessary to consider together with whether or not. Even if the discretion of the state is recognized, it is necessary to consider judging that it is a violation of the state’s obligation to protect basic rights for measures to set the amount of reduction that does not lead to the safety of life and body, survival and survival of the community.” In 2019, the Netherlands and last year were rulings in the Supreme Court of Ireland stating that the country’s GHG reduction plan was insufficient and concrete. “Europe is known to have responded to the climate crisis ahead of other countries,” said Yoon Se-jong, attorney for Climate Solutions, who is making a constitutional petition along with the youth climate action. Judicial judgment that such countries’ efforts are insufficient will have a great influence on lawsuits in other countries.”
Not only the Constitutional Court but also the National Human Rights Commission of Korea are being asked to judge the relationship between the climate crisis and human rights. In December of last year, the Climate Crisis Human Rights Group, which the Green Alliance and Dasan Human Rights Center participated in, submitted a petition to the National Human Rights Commission of Korea with the voices of farmers, fishermen, workers, youth, etc., whose life, health, and freedom of career choice were restricted due to the climate crisis . Asha Dasan Human Rights Center activist said, “The climate crisis is a long-term issue and a big issue involving various ministries. The NHRCK, which has not dealt with the climate crisis in terms of human rights, will be contemplating how to approach this issue. After all, it is a matter of the will of the NHRCK.”
Yoon Hyun-jung, a youth climate action activist living in Ulsan, gives a testimony at the’Human Rights Violation Testimony due to the Climate Crisis’ held at Rachel Carson Hall of the Environmental Foundation in Jung-gu, Seoul on the afternoon of November 26 last year. On this day, the testimony contest was held online due to the spread of Corona 19. Reporter Choi Woori
The Philippine Human Rights Commission has already acknowledged that the climate crisis is a human rights issue, and that multinational corporations that make money by emitting greenhouse gases are highly responsible. It is the first among the world’s national human rights organizations. At the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP25) held in December 2019, the Philippine Human Rights Commission announced that 47 major carbon-emitting companies, including Shell and ExxonMobil, should fulfill their legal and moral responsibilities to Filipino citizens who have been infringed upon human rights due to climate change. The most devastating typhoon in history led to this decision. In November 2013, Super Typhoon Haiyan hit the Philippines. There were also local reports that the death toll reached 6,340. In September 2015, 18 farmers and fishermen, Greenpeace Philippines office, and Philippine human rights organizations filed a petition to the Philippine Human Rights Commission asking carbon-emitting companies to be responsible for the damage to the climate crisis. Human rights groups in the Philippines released a human rights report that began with the following words after a joint investigation over four years. “We have seen how poorer communities can be made poorer by the impact of climate change. Businesses have the right to do business, but we also have the right to live.” By Choi Woo-ri, staff reporter [email protected]