Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
The European Court of Human Rights ruling favoring Swiss women sets a precedent for holding governments accountable to #climateaction worldwide. More communities are expected to step up and demand #climatejustice. 🌍💪 #climatelitigation #europeanclimatetrials pic.twitter.com/c8w56EPUOZ
— UNCS News (@UNClimateSummit) April 9, 2024
Everyone should just start suing the government over the weather.
They will apparently just give you money because you don’t like the weather and you wish it was much colder.
Personally, I don’t like cold weather at all. But I would lie about that to get free money from the government.
Europe’s top human rights court ruled on Tuesday 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 will set a precedent for future climate lawsuits.
The European Court of Human Rights’s ruling, in favour of the more than 2,000 Swiss women who brought the case, is expected to resonate in court decisions across Europe and beyond, and to embolden more communities to bring climate cases against governments.
But in a sign of the complexities of the growing wave of climate litigation, the court (ECtHR) rejected two other climate-related cases on procedural grounds. One of these was brought by a group of six Portuguese young people against 32 European governments and another by a former mayor of a low-lying French coastal town.
The Swiss women, known as KlimaSeniorinnen and aged over 64, said their government’s climate inaction put them at risk of dying during heatwaves. They argued their age and gender made them particularly vulnerable to such climate change impacts.
In her ruling, Court President Siofra O’Leary said the Swiss government had failed to comply with its own targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions and had failed to set a national carbon budget.
Why is there a paddy in charge of the Swiss court?
“It is clear that future generations are likely to bear an increasingly severe burden of the consequences of present failures and omissions to combat climate change,” O’Leary said.
One of KlimaSeniorinnen’s leaders, Rosmarie Wydler-Wälti said she was struggling to grasp the full extent of the decision.
“We keep asking our lawyers, ‘Is that right?’. And they tell us ‘it’s the most you could have had. The biggest victory possible’.”
The verdict in the Swiss case, which cannot be appealed, will have international ripple effects, most directly by establishing a binding legal precedent for all 46 countries that are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights.
It indicates Switzerland has a legal duty to take greater action on reducing emissions.
If Switzerland does not update its policies, further litigation could follow at the national level and courts could issue financial penalties, Lucy Maxwell, co-director of the non-profit Climate Litigation Network, said.
I don’t think these women are actually getting paid cash.
But they can write books and so on.
Whatever the case, it’s a very good idea to sue these people over the weather.
I mean, unless you have something better to do, you might as well do this.
