Expert Webinar “Climate Change on Trial: Lessons from the Inter-American Court’s Advisory Opinion on Climate Change and Human Rights”at NYU’s Climate Law Accelerator

On July 8th, Theresa Amor-Juergenssen (Co-Founder and Legal Director of NIKA and Legal Research Lead at World’s Youth for Climate Justice) had the opportunity to sit down with César Rodríguez-Garavito (Chair of the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at NYU School of law), Elisa Morgera (UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Climate Change), and David R. Boyd (Former UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment) to discuss the developments in the field of Climate Justice brought about by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights recent advisory opinion on human rights in the climate emergency in an expert webinar organized by the Climate Law Accelerator at NYU.  Marking the launch of the open access book Climate Change on trial by Rodriguez Garavito, the conversation serves as a preliminary point of reflection on the progressive stances taken by the Inter-American Court to address the world’s most pressing problem. 

In the discussion Garavito emphasised that the Opinion serves as a systematization of the development in the field of human rights as relates to the protection of the environment and noted the massive changes seen over the past two decades. In particular, he recounted the long path from the first petitions received by the commission centered on climate change which at the time were met with confusion, all the way to the massive 232 page Opinion which clearly states that States have human rights obligations in the context of the climate emergency. 

Moguera complimented this position placing special emphasis on the importance of corporate accountability and what the Court indicated in regards to self regulation and due diligence obligations. Additionally, the Special Rapporteur highlighted the relevance of the right to science recognized by the Court as protected by article 26 of the American Convention and the inclusive stance taken by the Court on this topic: making the right inclusive of indigenous, traditional, and local knowledge to holistically address global challenges. 

Former Special Rapporteur, David R. Boyd, for his part, put the spotlight on the Court’s development of the right to a healthy environment through the recognition of a human right to a healthy climate. In particular, he noted this as a relevant step in fulfilling the right’s transformative potential, which builds on the Court’s practice in the case of La Oroya, where the rights to clean air and water were recognized. Though he regretted the Court not delving deeper into fossil fuel phase out and loss and damage, Boyd nevertheless emphasised the important effects the Opinion will have beyond San José.

Theresa Amor-Juergenssen noted the profoundly participative process the Court undertook in the course of the advisory proceedings: holding hearings in the heart of the Amazon (Manaos and Brasilia, Brazil) and frontline communities in small island states (Bridgetown, Barbados). The specific contributions of the youth were a key part of her intervention specifically as it relates to the operationalization of the principle of intergenerational equity.  In particular, Amor-Juergenssen took note of the Court’s focus on humanity as a collective that exists on a cross-temporal spectrum which includes both present and future generations. In her view, this position permeates the entirety of the Court’s reasoning on the specific obligations of States in regards to climate change and is particularly palpable in three key developments: the recognition of nature as a subject of rights; the incorporation of the right to a healthy climate into the Inter-American System; and the prohibition of significant harm to the climate system as a jus cogens norm. This latter point, in particular, stems from a recognition of the reality of our situation: the health of the planet, the environment, and its ecosystem, including the climate system, constitutes a baseline condition that makes the protection of all of our human rights feasible.

In closing, Theresa emphasised the importance of the implementation of the AO at the domestic level and the particular need for legal systems to adapt to comply with the (collective and individual) standing and evidentiary parameters set out in the Opinion. Further, and with a view to the future, she took note of the interesting connection made by the Court between democracy and the climate system: a connection already hinted at in article 15 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter and the potential future relevance of environmental democracy in the Inter-American system. 

In all, the webinar held by the NYU Law’s Climate Law Accelerator (CLX) provided a fruitful space for reflection on the state of the art of human rights and its capacity to address the world’s most pressing problem. Spaces like these are an essential part of the implementation process and facilitate active dialogue which will continue to be relevant as we wait for the delivery of the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice this 23rd of July. 

The recording of the webinar will be linked here as soon as it is made available.