Guest essay by Eric Worrall
This judgement has implications for US border control, as unskilled illegal immigrants who attempt to enter the USA are starting to claim they are really climate refugees.
Climate refugees can’t be returned home, says landmark UN human rights ruling
Experts say judgment is ‘tipping point’ that opens the door to climate crisis claims for protection
Kate Lyons Pacific editor @MsKateLyons
Mon 20 Jan 2020 16.27 AEDT Last modified on Mon 20 Jan 2020 16.59 AEDTIt is unlawful for governments to return people to countries where their lives might be threatened by the climate crisis, a landmark ruling by the United Nations human rights committee has found.
The judgment – which is the first of its kind – represents a legal “tipping point” and a moment that “opens the doorway” to future protection claims for people whose lives and wellbeing have been threatened due to global heating, experts say.
Tens of millions of people are expected to be displaced by global heating in the next decade.
The judgment relates to the case of Ioane Teitiota, a man from the Pacific nation of Kiribati, which is considered one of the countries most threatened by rising sea levels. He applied for protection in New Zealand in 2013, claiming his and his family’s lives were at risk.
The committee heard evidence of overcrowding on the island of South Tarawa, where Teitiota lived, saying that the population there had increased from 1,641 in 1947 to 50,000 in 2010 due to sea level rising leading to other islands becoming uninhabitable, which had led to violence and social tensions.
…
While the judgment is not formally binding on countries, it points to legal obligations that countries have under international law.
“What’s really important here, and why it’s quite a landmark case, is that the committee recognised that without robust action on climate at some point in the future it could well be that governments will, under international human rights law, be prohibited from sending people to places where their life is at risk or where they would face inhuman or degrading treatment,” said Prof Jane McAdam, director of the Kaldor centre for international refugee law at the University of New South Wales.
“Even though in this particular case there was no violation found, it effectively put governments on notice.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/20/climate-refugees-cant-be-returned-home-says-landmark-un-human-rights-ruling
I’m a bit puzzled why New Zealand climate zealots have fixated so hard on Ioane Teitiota. He was fired from a job in New Zealand after allegedly sexually assaulting a co-worker and attacking others. If the allegations are true, not someone you would want as a next door neighbour. Even New Zealand threw him out, and they normally accept pretty much anyone.
Immigrants who want special treatment should show a little respect for the culture and laws of their hosts.
One of most danger animals in Africa is hippopotamus. It hides in muddy water and attacks without warning an unexpected victim.
If warming continues, I’m afraid of being killed by them returning to Rhine River (Hippopotamus antiquus).
So if I apply for asylum, do I get a citizenship or redirection to insane asylum?
In a world where everywhere is warming twice as fast as everywhere else – surely it would expose ‘climate refugees’ to unaccounted catastrophic risk by not returning them home?
In September 2018, The Guardian carried a story about 5 American “ climate refugees”.
It was subtitled “ Five people from across the US explain how extreme weather forced them out of their homes not always to safer ground”.
It recorded that one family had moved from New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina to Houston only to be in harm’s way with Hurricane Harvey.
In future litigation in the US , it is clear that Counsel for the Government must argue that the US is an unsafe destination for applicants who flee other countries as “climate refugees”.
Hey, that’s a great idea! In our country (Switzerland) there are avalanches and rockslides. There’s even a fire department to combat floods and fires! There are also lots of roads where one can get run over. Much too dangerous for climate refugees…
Wow, that is a beautiful defense:
“Sorry, we agree You and your family are climate refugees, but we cannot let you into this country as we recon our climate will endanger you further. Please go to gate 24 to return to where you came from. Have a nice day.”
As far as Climate Goes, Russia and China appear to be unaffected
The UN rules… = the UN would like to rule! For that they have to abolish nations first. Massive immigration is a clear step in that direction, disrupting local way of life and cohesion. With a climate “emergency” they “create” a situation which enables bypassing of democratic decision making processes. Soft laws from soft brains…
It’s time to put the UN back in its place: less power and influence, not more.
It seems to me that this is not a rule but merely a suggestion. Lawyers however will disagree as it will bring in a lot of lucrative business.
The UN is quickly heading to a crisis point where western countries will begin to ignore their “global edicts” that they expect sovereign nations to follow. The UN is fast losing its mandate originally formed in WWII to prevent it happening again, and provide global security. How far they have moved away from that original goal.
All citizens of China live in a country fraught with danger, and that applies to North Korea and a dozen more! The total is more than two billion people who live under constan repression!!
And it isn’t climate change that puts these people in danger–it is their repressive communist governments! The UN’s ruling imposes crazy restritions on the right of nations to protect their borders consistent with the former’s communistic overbearing attitude! The quicker the US kicks the UN out of the US, the better!
Demonstrable joke: Why doesn’t AOC ever criticize China? Ans: They’re already communists!
Demonstrable joke: Why doesn’t AOC ever criticize China? Ans: China already has a “perfect” one-party government, providing AOC with cheap mobile phone.
Only one phone? Of course, a community phone.
Well, time to leave the U.N.
Since there isn’t anything manmade global warming isn’t responsible for, we’re already climate refugees even if we move from Chicago to Florida to escape the occasional polar vortex and any natural disaster that comes along.
Here in Arizona we have thousands of climate refugees who come here every winter from Canada and the northern Midwest to escape the cold and snow…and every summer we have thousands of Arizonan refugees escaping the climate to cooler places around the country. Can these people claim refugee status? This could be a real good deal for my family and me when we ‘flee’ to the mountains in summer! Maybe we can score some benefits from taxpayers…
…the BLM and Forest Service have plenty of acres.. much of it prime building lots, too!
Certainly they understand fair climate rules!
Definitely sounds like a tax credit…Climate Refugee Temporary Relocation Credit.
I hope my vacation to beach qualifies.
Any sovereign country has an absolute right to control its own borders. So the UN America-haters club can pound sand.
Easy.
Stop listening to the UN.
Better yet – get OUT of the UN, and stop wasting $$ on it.
And the US response to this edict should be direct – “There is no “climate crisis,” and this rule is therefore applicable to nobody.”
“It is unlawful for governments to return people to countries where their lives might be threatened by the climate crisis, a landmark ruling by the United Nations human rights committee has found.”
Since there are zero countries where lives might be threatened by the (non-existant) climate crisis, then there are, by definition zero refugees due to that alleged cause.
I don’t think so. The U.S. government regularly ignores stupid UN decrees, like their international criminal court and the notion that they can try U.S. military personnel for supposed “war crimes” under their liberal definition of them. We recognize that the UN has no sovereign authority over any nation, certainly not ours.
But shirley, isn’t the whole world threatened by the global warming? It makes more sense for people to stay where they are and suck it up. After all, humans already live and breed in every climate the planet has to offer.
Countries could also argue that they shouldn’t have to accept “climate refugees” from countries with an increasing natural population (from a net-positive indigenous birthrate). Since climate changes on a generational timescale, a naturally increasing population is clear evidence that the climate is not a serious impediment to the humans that already live there.
“Tens of millions of people are expected to be displaced by global heating in the next decade.”
————————————————————–
Tens of millions of people were expected to be displaced by global heating in each of the previous 3 decades. So far not a one. Global warmunists seem to have very short memories.
It seems to me that a tipping point has been reached on the matter of deciding whether to remain a member of the U.N. Many non-socialist countries should now opt out, especially if they wish to maintain control of immigration and other matters in which interfering outsiders should have no say.
I live in Texas…I should be able to move just about ANYWHERE in the world claiming I am a refugee fleeing hot temperatures. The problem is, most parts of the world are now ruled by complete idiots (including the U.N.), so I guess I’ll stay here where a fringe of common sense remains.
From the article: “Tens of millions of people are expected to be displaced by global heating in the next decade.”
I expect you’ll be eating those words in about 10 years.
The global temperatures are actually cooling a few tenths of a degree over the last few years. Did you expect that? Obviously, not, from your statement. So, what you expect, may not be a good forecast of what actually happens, it would appear to me.
Nope. They’ll still be saying those words in 10 years. They’ll just have forgotten that they’ve been saying the same thing for 4 decades, and so will the fools who pay attention to them.
The UN is just a complete joke. The general assembly is basically a Marxist sponsor organization.
Can I claim climate refugeehood by moving to a warm country to escape the cold in Canada?
Eff the UN.
I would NEVER obey them or their laws in any way, shape, or form.
Kiribati man; is that anything like Piltdown man?
A guy from the island of Kiribati tried to claim climate refugee status in N. Zealand a while back.
“UN Rules Climate Refugees Cannot Be Rejected”
—
They think they’re the EU Commission now, and can without being elected by the people, undermine every country’s sovereignty, policy making and stability.
U N E X I T !
____________