In December 2019, the Dutch Supreme Court had a landmark decision. This is a lawsuit on the issue of climate change. The plaintiff is an environmental protection organization and the defendant is the Dutch government. The plaintiffs complained that the government reduced the CO2 reduction target from 25% to 20%, and after appealing to the Supreme Court, the judge granted the plaintiff's claim and ordered the government to return to the 25% reduction target.
The notable point of this case was that if it did not curb CO2 emissions, it would jeopardize the lives and well-being of citizens, a decision that linked CO2 with climate change and human rights, as opposed to the European Convention on Human Rights.
A huge typhoon in Japan, endless forest fires in Australia and floods in India have changed ecosystems and caused serious locust prague in Africa. Unpredictable changes have been cascading even with supercomputers.
Financial institutions and institutional investors who have suffered enormous losses have been reducing funding for projects that emit greenhouse gases (divestment), and companies have begun to steer significantly to prevent global warming. Consumer awareness has also changed rapidly, and there has been a noticeable shift away from choosing products that degrade the environment.
For such a huge problem that the world needs to cooperate and address, it is required to work together on a global framework such as the Paris Agreement agreed by 196 countries, but on the other hand, there are countries that have left or had not participated, and they are not in line with each other.
RuleWatcher ™ will keep you updated on the latest global warming prevention measures and their signs, as well as lawsuits related to climate change, such as the Dutch case shown above.