Activists say that the civil litigation campaign against major polluters is accelerating and more lawyers are needed to join the fight.
Activists are increasingly turning to the law to help fill the vacuum created by the lack of regulation, which will force companies and countries to comply with the Paris Agreement.
Greenpeace stated that precedent rulings made by courts in multiple jurisdictions show that it is the responsibility of the state to protect future generations, which means that this struggle has become easier and easier.
It said that emerging science quantifying the role of climate change in extreme weather may also cause legal problems for governments and large companies.
Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace International, said that more lawyers should be involved and told them: “You will be part of a growing community that basically just takes (polluters) to court and wins.”
Greenpeace announced on Tuesday that it will file a lawsuit Volkswagen Failed to transform production and supply to meet the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C.
The announcement was made before the “Transportation Day” of the Cop26 Climate Summit, and many countries announced plans to switch to electric vehicles at the meeting.
According to the analysis of Greenpeace, in order to comply with the Paris Agreement, Volkswagen must reduce its emissions by 65% from 2018 levels by 2030, and phase out internal combustion engine production by 2030.
The case relies on German The Federal Constitutional Court stated in April this year that future generations have the fundamental right to be protected from the effects of climate change.
Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace International, said that the principle of “intergenerational fairness” is at the core of the German ruling and will promote litigation elsewhere.
Ms. Morgan said in an event at Cop26: “(German courts) found that inadequate plans to achieve these net-zero targets will result in an unconstitutional shift in the burden of emission reductions on young people.”
She continued: “Future generations will face the task of reducing emissions at an impossible rate.
“Therefore, there is intergenerational fairness in court, and I think it will be more.”
Ms. Morgan said that attribution science is an emerging field, and trying to measure the role of climate change in promoting extreme weather events is another factor that may form the basis of litigation.
“Attribution science can connect these events to companies that have contributed to and are responsible for the increase in global average temperature (in order) to hold them accountable. This is a big step forward for science and litigation. “she says.
You will be part of a growing community that basically just takes (polluters) to court and wins.
Ms. Morgan called on lawyers and civilians to join the legal battle against big polluting companies.
“If you are a lawyer, please come in. If you are an affected person, please defend your rights. You will become part of a growing community that basically just takes (polluters) to court. And win.”
Sophie Marjanac, Head of Climate Responsibility, Environmental Law Charity Customer Earth Said that the climate litigation movement is accelerating.
She told the PA News Agency: “I think people understand the power of the law better than ever. People are tired of failed policy procedures, so they go to the courts-we see more of the world of victory.”
She continued: “We have received a court order requiring Royal Dutch Shell to reduce its emissions by 45% by 2030-which was unthinkable a few years ago, and therefore cited a huge shift in the judge’s view. “
Ms. Marjanac added: “The litigation is crucial because it can fill this gap and it will fill the gap without the legislators intervening in setting strict rules on (emissions).”
“Progress is slow. Litigation is a slow process. It often follows social movements, but it will eventually catch up with them. It may catch up before politicians.”
Shefali Sharma, director of the Institute of Agricultural and Trade Policy (IATP), said that large agribusinesses may soon be in trouble.
“The public has conducted a review of the fossil fuel carbon profession, but there is not even a small part of this review of the meat and dairy products profession.”
She continued: “From now on, there is more and more discussion about livestock emissions, but I don’t think there is so much scrutiny on the company itself. They are the ones who promote this destructive model.”
Ms. Sharma gave an example Danish Meat producers have been sued successfully for making false claims about the sustainable certification of their products.
“So this is the first lawsuit against a meat company. Obviously, the litigation area surrounding these companies is full of opportunities.”
Volkswagen has been asked to comment on the Greenpeace lawsuit.
