The European Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of a group of elderly Swiss women who argued that their government’s inadequate efforts to combat climate change put them at risk of dying during heatwaves https://t.co/3BcirckNqn pic.twitter.com/xAb47HHgRP
— Reuters (@Reuters) April 9, 2024
Climate litigation insanity in Europe.
A Swiss group of elderly women argued that they were particularly vulnerable to the extreme heat that is becoming more frequent.
The European Court of Human Rights found in their favor https://t.co/RiRFsXy3BE— Judith Curry (@curryja) April 9, 2024
The European Court of Human Rights has set an historic precedent by ruling that the Swiss government has failed to comply with its duties under the European Convention concerning climate change and not done enough to protect older Swiss women from harm. https://t.co/K5Ohew6hBO pic.twitter.com/PhphVj9GOx
— amnestypress (@amnestypress) April 9, 2024
Notice the case had been dismissed TWICE at the Swiss level. We wonder what is going on behind the scenes at the ECHR. Grab the popcorn.
Switzerland “Violated Human Rights” By Not Tackling Climate-Change Quickly Enough, ECHR Rules In Landmark Case
Authored by Thomas Brooke via ReMix News
National governments are infringing on citizens’ human rights by not doing enough to tackle climate change, the European Court of Human Rights has held in a landmark ruling that could have far-reaching consequences and influence climate policy across the continent.
In a highly-anticipated judgment, the Strasbourg court on Tuesday sided with a group of Swiss pensioners who brought a claim against their national government for its perceived failure to act sufficiently in reducing carbon emissions, claiming that existing climate policy was violating their human rights.
The members of the KlimaSeniorinnen group, supported by environmental campaign groups such as Greenpeace, argued that elderly citizens are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, citing the fact that excess deaths occur more regularly among the elderly during periods of extreme heat because they are less able to regulate their body temperature.
The group also claimed that heat waves impact the mental well-being of elderly citizens more because they are less able to go outside and withstand the heat, which they argue affects their quality of life.
The association relied on Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the general right to life, and Article 8, which guarantees the right to private and family life.
Domestic governments are obliged to take “reasonable and appropriate measures” to secure these rights, steps members of the KlimaSeniorinnen group claimed the Swiss government had not taken.
The litigation had been appealed by the group up to the top human rights court in Europe after its claim was rejected first by the Federal Administrative Court in Switzerland and then by the Federal Supreme Court, the country’s highest ruling body.
The judgment is the third of three similar cases the court was asked to consider in respect to the correlation between climate change and human rights and sets a precedent that all national courts in Council of Europe member states will be required to adhere to.
It had recently dismissed the other two cases, brought by Portuguese youths and a former French mayor who had claimed their respective national governments had infringed on their human rights by not being ambitious enough with their climate targets.
The move could see governments across Europe required to take even greater measures to press on with reducing carbon emissions and pursuing a green agenda that many citizens believe is being wrongly prioritized and expedited to their own detriment.
Climate activists celebrated the ruling outside the Strasbourg court on Tuesday, accompanied by Swedish climate zealot Greta Thunberg.
“The ECHR verdict will send an important signal worldwide,” said Raphaël Mahaim, a lawyer involved in the case and a Green Party lawmaker in the Swiss parliament.
Source
************
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Yeah! Let them have the Laws adopted then sue the governments/militaries for spraying the poisonous chemtrails content on all of us, thus altering Earth’s climates everywhere the Aluminium/Strontium/Barium winds blow.
Look-up and see how their persistant planes trails striate our blue no more skies!
We now have squared, zigzagged, colourful or check board clouds. The more there are, the more it rains/snows the day-s after their spraying.
This is not normal!
THEIR CLIMATE CHANGES ARE KILLING YOU AND ALL LIVING CREATURES ON EARTH.
It sounds like monty python but in reality it is part of a very long planned GENOCIDE. To see the big picture, recommended (long) reading from “as in Rwanda” to the end :
THE COMING FALL OF THE HOUSE OF WINDSOR
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_blacknobil12.htm
Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
November 1994
from Scribd Website
(…)
« As in Rwanda, the parks have multiple purposes:
Taking huge tracts of land out of circulation for economic productive purposes. Although the United Nations magazine Choices predicts that « by the year 2000 nearly half the country of Zimbabwe will be raising its cash from wildlife, » the creation of such parks is one of the biggest land-clearing operations since Genghis Khan leveled Central Asia in the thirteenth century.
As one British source put it:
« WHEN THE BRITISH WISHED TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT OF AN AREA, THEY TENDED TO MAKE IT INTO A GAME RESERVE, which gave them a raison d’etre. ‘This is a game reserve, so you can’t be here.’ »
Over 17% of the land of tiny Rwanda is locked up in such reserves.
While taking land out of circulation for development, the reserves often squat on land that has potentially wealthy yields of strategic resources. For example, the border-area parks of Niger cover an undeveloped uranium field.
Park administration by extra-national agencies such as the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) is a direct assault on national sovereignty. Under the guise of fighting poachers, administration often involves paramilitary forces.
« The function of the national park is to keep control of that land out of the hands of the local government, » one expert informed EIR. « The national park is governed by a board of trustees, at least they originally were… These were autarchies controlled by white conservationists, all of whom were military people. »
In five countries in Africa – Cameroon, Zaire, the Ivory Coast, Kenya, and Zambia – the WWF administers at least one park.
In five other countries, the parks are administered by agencies such as the U.N. Development Program, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, or the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.
The parks are safe havens and staging grounds for INSURGENCIES OF ALL STRIPES. As documented below, many reserves and parks straddle borders, with the parks functioning as « MILITARIZED ZONES. » Prince Philip’s WWF was administering the gorilla program in the Virunga park, while the RPF was using the Virunga to maraud Rwanda.
In fact, RPF-sponsor Uganda has been profiting from the dislocation of the gorillas caused by the RPF operations. According to Africa Analysis, the RPF invasion had sent Rwanda’s gorillas running to Uganda, giving Museveni the opportunity to launch his own « eco-tourism program. »
Without the safe havens, provided by the royal family’s park system, the protracted civil and border wars afflicting Africa since the 1970s would have been impossible. »
(…)
WWF – Send Europe back to the Dark Age
If Prince Philip and the WWF have their way, Europe in the early years of the twenty-first century will be a throwback to the feudal era of the Black Plague that preceded the Golden Renaissance of the fifteenth century.
In the last two years, the WWF and one of its corporate affiliates, the Heineken Breweries of The Netherlands, have produced a series of studies advocating the break-up of the nation-states of Europe and a four-fold increase in the number of nature preserves, game parks, and protected areas in continental western Europe.
The Heineken study calls for redrawing the map of Europe into 75 mini-states, with populations of 10 million people at the most. Each mini-state would be ruled by a member of one of the existing European Royal Houses.
Board Chairman A.H. Heineken, the sponsor of the plan, is a longtime booster of WWF and IUCN efforts. For many years, John Loudon, the former chairman of the board of Royal Dutch Shell and the international president of WWF from 1977 to 1981, had a seat on the Heineken board.
The plan has been embraced by Ecoropa, one of the important WWF affiliates in Europe, founded by the late self-described “universal fascist” Denis de Rougemont and Teddy Goldsmith.
This year, WWF and IUCN issued a study called “Parks for Life: Action for Protected Areas in Europe,” which called for quadrupling the set-aside land in western Europe.
The scheme would shut down all pending plans for new rail systems, water projects, and other vital East-West infrastructure projects, because all of these interlinks would be cut off by the parks. The blueprint is consistent with the Heineken proposal, and calls for the nation-state system to be replaced with a new political geography based on “bio-regions.”
To make sure that this re-feudalization scheme is successful, many of WWF’s wealthiest boosters, including a number of 1001 Club members, are reportedly buying up large tracts of land in areas designated as future parks and protected areas.
If Prince Philip and the WWF-IUCN apparatus run up against resistance to these schemes, they have a growing Green Party movement across the continent to turn to as goon squads.
Europe’s Green movement was created as the joint project of the WWF and the former secret police agencies of the Soviet bloc, particularly the East German Stasi (state security service).