About Time – An Examination of the Threats Posed by Climate Change and the Protection of Individuals Against Them Offered by the European Convention of Human Rights

Abstract: Anthropogenically caused climate change is now considered a reality. Recent climate scientific insights regarding climate-related risks, e.g. heat-waves, floods, droughts etc., have generated an increased focus on limiting the rise in global mean temperature to not exceeding the 1.5°C target enshrined in the Paris Agreement. Currently however, that target is estimated to be exceeded somewhere between 2030–2052 and global mean temperature is on a trajectory towards at least 2.5°C. Hence, it’s about time to upscale climate change combatting measures! In Europe, domestic attempts of upscaling State climate change response have recently focused on linking climate risks to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), primarily Articles 2 (the Right to Life) and 8 (the Right to Respect for Private and Family Life). The thesis examines this recent development and asks how suitable those Articles are to serve as a protection of individuals against the dangerous materialization of climate risks by generating State responsibility to combat climate change. The thesis mainly focuses on the foundational topic regarding the existence of an ECHR climate change protection at all and its existential conditions. Despite no final rulings on climate change matters by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), its vast case-law on environmental matters constitutes the linchpin of this research. As is shown, both Articles are able to generate State responsibility in terms of positive obligations in states of risk. However, some challenges to the extension of ECHR protection to climate change matters, thus questioning its suitability, are identified. The main challenge is constituted by the need for those trying to link climate change to the ECHR to show an existence of a ‘real and immediate’/’direct and severe’ risk. After investigating and analyzing how these challenges have been dealt with in three domestic cases, the thesis concludes that theoretically, the challenges can be overcome, thus the ECHR Articles can be quite suitable also regarding climate matters. However, because of the domestic courts’ different interpretations of ECtHR case-law, especially whether current climate risks temporally fit the risk conditions required to give rise to positive obligations, the suitability can be questioned in practice. Nonetheless, the suitability question clearly is largely a question about time.