Possibilities and Approaches of European Court of Human Rights and Court of Justice of the European Union in Fundamental Rights Protection in the Context of Environmental Litigation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2023.7.2.391Keywords:
European Court of Human Rights, Court of Justice of the European Union, Standards of the Environmental Protection, Environmental Litigation for Future GenerationsAbstract
Two judicial bodies, but both without right to protect the environment established. This is also how the coexistence of the two important judicial bodies located in the European area could be briefly characterized. The European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union were created for different purposes, but their jurisprudence in the area of environmental protection and the protection of people's lives and health from the negative consequences of climate change overlap more than it might seem at first sight. We find certain similarities in terms of ensuring a certain degree of protection of fundamental rights in the context of the environment. The European Court of Human Rights has a priority in terms of the protection of fundamental rights in Europe, but in the field of the environment it faces several problems. Especially when we are talking about the protection of rights for future generations, where there is no direct victim or direct violation of fundamental rights, only a very high risk of their violation. On the other hand, the Court of Justice of the European Union has a much greater assumption of effectiveness, which has the potential to change the legislation of the member states and thereby indirectly ensure the protection of people's lives and health. Recently, the activity of the European Commission has been increasing in the interest of achieving climate neutrality, and this also means greater pressure on the states in the interest of the complete and correct transposition of European regulations in the field of the environment. In case of deficiencies, the European Commission can intervene by filing a lawsuit according to Article 258 of the TFEU, and achieve the required remedy. Although, such a procedure is not primarily aimed at the protection of fundamental rights, the positive impact on their protection cannot be neglected.
References
Carême v. France (2021). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/careme-v-france/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
De Conto v. Italy and 32 other States (2021). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/de-conto-v-italy-and-32-other-states/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
De Schutter, O. (2017). Infringement Proceedings as a Tool for the Enforcement of Fundamental Rights in the European Union. Brussel: Open Society European Policy Institute. Available at: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/uploads/f637765b-ee20-4e6e-9cda-b74151f9a369/infringement-proceedings-as-tool-for-enforcement-of-fundamental-rights-in-eu-20171214.pdf (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Engels and Others v. Germany (2022). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/engels-and-others-v-germany/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway (2021). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/greenpeace-nordic-assn-v-ministry-of-petroleum-and-energy-ecthr/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Heri, C. (2022). Climate Change before the European Court of Human Rights: Capturing Risk, Ill-Treatment and Vulnerability. European Journal of International Law, 33(3), 925–951, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chac047
Humane Being v. the United Kingdom (2022). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/factory-farming-v-uk/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
KlimaSeniorinnen v Switzerland (2020). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/union-of-swiss-senior-women-for-climate-protection-v-swiss-federal-council-and-others/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Müllner v. Austria (2021). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/mex-m-v-austria/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Plan B.Earth and Others v United Kingdom (2022). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/plan-bearth-and-others-v-united-kingdom/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Ramírez-Cárdenas Díaz, J. D. (2020). Sharpening the Teeth of the Infringement Procedure. In: European Institute of Public Administration, publish on August, 2020. Available at: https://www.eipa.eu/publications/briefing/sharpening-the-teeth-of-the-infringement-procedure/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Schmid, E. (2022). Victim Status before the ECtHR in Cases of Alleged Omissions: The Swiss Climate Case. In: Blog of the European Journal of International Law, published on April 30, 2022. Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/victim-status-before-the-ecthr-in-cases-of-alleged-omissions-the-swiss-climate-case/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Setzer, J., Narulla, H., Higham, C. and Bradeen, E. (2022). Climate litigation in Europe: A summary report for the European Union Forum of Judges for the Environment. London and Brussels: Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment and Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science and the European Union Forum of Judges for the Environment.
The Norwegian Grandparents’ Climate Campaign and others v. Norway (2021). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/the-norwegian-grandparents-climate-campaign-and-others-v-norway/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
Uricchio v. Italy and 32 other States (2021). In: Climate Change Litigation Databases. Available at: http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/uricchio-v-italy-and-32-other-states/ (accessed on 31.10.2023).
van Zeben, J. (2021). The Role of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in Climate Litigation. German Law Journal, 22(8), 1499-1510, doi:10.1017/glj.2021.78
Viljanen, J. (2009). The Role of the European Court of Human Rights as a Developer of International Human Rights Law. In: Cuadernos Constitucionales de la Cátedra Fadrique Furió Ceriol nº 62/63. Available at: https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r26759.pdf (accessed on 31.10.2023).
CJEU, judgment of 12 November 1969, Erich Stauder v. Stadt Ulm – Sozialamt, C-29-69, ECLI:EU:C:1969:57.
CJEU, judgment of 2 September 2021, European Commission against Kingdom of Sweden, C-22/20, ECLI:EU:C:2021:669.
CJEU, judgment of 13 January 2022, European Commission against Slovak republic, C-683/20, ECLI:EU:C:2022:22.
CJEU, judgement of 31 March 2022, Commission européenne contre République portugaise, C-687/20, ECLI:EU:C:2022:244.
CJEU, judgment of 28 April 2022, European Commission against Bulgaria, C-510/20, ECLI:EU:C:2022:324.
CJEU, judgment of 28 April 2022, European Commission against French republic, C-286/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:319.
CJEU, judgment of 22 June 2022, European Commission against Slovak republic, C-661/20, ECLI:EU:C:2022:496.
CJEU, judgment of 22 December 2022, European Commission against Spain, C-125/20, ECLI:EU:C:2022:1025.
CJEU, judgment of 9 February 2023, European Commission against Slovakia, C- 342/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:87.
CJEU, judgment of 16 February 2023, European Commission against Greece, C-633/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:112.
CJEU, judgment of 2 March 2023, European Commission against Poland, C-432/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:139.
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union.
Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Ú. v. ES L 206, 1992, s. 7; Spec. ed. 15/002)
Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise (Ú. v. ES L 189, 18.7.2002)
ECHR, López Ostra v. Spain, app. no. 16798/90, 9 December 1994.
ECHR, Öneryıldız v. Turkey, app. no. 48939/99, 30 November 2004.
ECHR, Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and Others, no. 39371/20, December 2020 (Information Note on the Court’s case-law 246).
Recommendation 2211 (2021) Anchoring the right to a healthy environment: need for enhanced action by the Council of Europe, available at: https://pace.coe.int/en/files/29501/html
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Bratislava Law Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Author(s) transfers copyright to the Article to the Publisher of the Journal by the Licence Agreement.
The Author(s) retains rights specified in the Licence Agreement.
The readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of all of the Article of the Journal and use them for any other lawful purpose under specified Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
Funding data
-
Agentúra na Podporu Výskumu a Vývoja
Grant numbers APVV-20-0576
