Abstract

The KlimaSeniorinnen judgment has many interesting aspects. Prominent among them is the Strasbourg Court's approach to the issue of its jurisdiction in climate change litigation, where the Court balances its role as an international court with respect for the principle of subsidiarity and the legislative powers of member states. Another innovative aspect of the judgment concerns the remarkable opening of locus standi under Article 34 ECHR in favor of environmental associations. On the substantive issues, the Court establishes new principles, especially when it derives from Article 8 of the ECHR a right for individuals to enjoy effective state protection for the harmful effects caused by climate change. This right is matched by numerous positive obligations of states, both general and particular. However, the exact legal nature of some of these obligations remains uncertain. Less innovative is the part of the judgment that deals with the margin of appreciation reserved to the states and the parameters of the Court's judgment on whether that margin of appreciation is respected. Finally, one may ask whether the KlimaSeniorinnen ruling remains in the mainstream of the general human rights greening process or is intended to affect the progressive development of an autonomous human right to a healthy environment. Although with some caution, the second solution seems possible