Recently, the Europe’s top human rights court ruled that the Swiss government had violated the human rights of its citizens by failing to do enough to combat climate change, in a decision that set a precedent for future climate lawsuits. The European Court of Human Rights’ ruling, in favour of the more than 2,000 Swiss women who brought the case, is expected to resonate in court decisions across the world and beyond, and to embolden more communities to bring climate cases against governments.
The women group argued that the Swiss government has violated their rights by failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough to stop intensifying heatwaves and other climate impacts from affecting citizens.
In the same vein, for the South African communities vs Shell, the high court victories showed that cultural beliefs and practices count in climate cases. When the Shell petroleum company announced in 2021 that it wanted to explore for fossil fuels off South Africa’s pristine Wild Coast, Indigenous communities in the area immediately fought back through the country’s courts.TrendingNUP’s Ssenyonyi And Tebandeke Confirmed By Court Of Appeal
In two separate cases, the communities successfully challenged Shell. They won both cases, winning an interim interdict to put Shell’s exploration on hold and having the company’s exploration right set aside. Shell is appealing the second ruling on several, largely procedural, grounds, that process got underway in the Supreme Court of Appeal on 17 May this year.
If the Supreme Court of Appeal upholds the High Court’s judgment, this would affirm the Indigenous communities’ rights and interests. If, on the other hand, it overturns the judgment, the exploration right, which was granted 10 years ago, would continue to stand. These cases represent the first time that Indigenous communities can invoke their environmental, climate and cultural rights in climate litigation. Indeed, this decision adds to a growing body of indigenous-oriented climate litigation cases around the world, such as in Australia and the US.
Of course, this sounds commendable! However, as the world grapples with the existential threat of climate change, it has become increasingly clear that the current legal system is failing to hold corporations accountable for their environmental and social impact. Specifically, the courts have been overly lenient in favoring oil companies, allowing them to prioritize profits over people and the planet.
The most egregious example of this is the recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian (2020). In this case, the Court ruled that oil companies are not liable for contaminating native American reservations with toxic chemicals, despite clear evidence of negligence and harm to indigenous communities. This decision is a stark reminder of the long history of environmental racism and injustice perpetuated by the oil industry.
In addition, in the ExxonMobil’s ongoing lawsuit against climate change activists, the company is attempting to silence critics by claiming that they are harming its reputation and financial interests. This lawsuit is a classic example of corporate attempts to suppress free speech and stifle public debate.
Another incidence is realized in Uganda, where it was reported that the Uganda court ordered demolition of homes to pave way for Tilenga project. The upstream Tilenga project is a 190,000 barrels of oil per day oilfield operated by French oil giant TotalEnergies in the Lake Albert area, which has been mired in a dispute with local landowners seeking adequate compensation. This also looks to be a clear indication that courts often prioritize profits over people’s health and safety.
Such a decision by court sends a message to other landowners across the country that government has the power to throw them out of their property if any development project arises despite their dissatisfactions or grievances. This act was also another blot on Uganda’s oil projects where key players can be accused of manipulating the legal system to violate human rights of the project affected persons.
The oil companies across Africa have been always okayed by the legal systems to continue their operations with impunity, often at the expense of local communities and the environment despite the projects’ widespread pollution, displacement, and human rights violations. Yet, courts have consistently failed to hold these companies accountable for their actions.
For instance, in Nigeria, the Shell oil firm wanted to withdraw from the Niger delta before it takes responsibility for its toxic legacy of pollution and the safe decommissioning of abandoned oil infrastructure. The report, by the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations indicates that Shell plc is preparing to divest from the delta yet a historical pollution remains a serious issue in the area and the oil company is trying to avoid responsibility despite the billions of dollars it has earned from the oil.
The doctrine of corporate personhood, which grants corporations many of the same rights as human beings, has been used to shield companies from liability and accountability. This doctrine was established in the 19th century, when corporations were seen as essential to economic growth and development. However, today it is clear that corporate power has far outstripped its original purpose and has become a major obstacle to environmental and social justice.
So, what can be done to create a more pro-people court system? First, it is essential to reform corporate law to recognize that corporations are not individuals with constitutional rights. There should also be enhanced transparency and accountability in court proceedings by giving community groups and environmental organizations more access to information and resources.
More, we need to support grassroots movements and community-led initiatives that are fighting for environmental justice and social change. These movements are often led by marginalized communities who are most affected by climate change and pollution. This will help these movements to amplify their voices and create a more just and equitable society.
When we prioritize people over profit, we can create a more just and equitable society where everyone has access to clean air, water, and land. We owe it to ourselves, our children, and future generations to take action now.
PATRICK EDEMA
Environmental Engineer & Climate Change Activist at AFIEGO
DISLAIMER: The views expressed in this article are solely for and belong to the author/ writer. They don’t reflect, portray or represent those of Ultimate News, it’s affiliates, owners or employees. If you have a story in your community or an opinion article, let’s publish it. Send us an email via ultimatenews19@gmail.com.
PATRICK EDEMA: The Need For Courts To Prioritize The People, Not Oil Companies
