Essay by Eric Worrall
Weak Swiss Government climate policies were found to violate the rights of older Swiss women by increasing their risk of dying in heatwaves.
Human rights violated by inaction on climate, ECHR rules in landmark case
Court finds in favour of group of older Swiss women who claimed weak policies put them at greater risk of death from heatwaves
Ajit Niranjan Tue 9 Apr 2024 20.29 AEST
Weak government climate policies violate fundamental human rights, the European court of human rights has ruled.
…
The court’s top bench ruled that Switzerland had violated rights of a group of older Swiss women to family life, but threw out a French mayor’s case against France and that of a group of young Portuguese people against 32 European countries.
“It feels like a mixed result because two of the cases were inadmissible,” said Corina Heri, a law researcher at the University of Zürich. “But actually it’s a huge success.”
The court, which calls itself “the conscience of Europe”, found that Switzerland had failed to comply with its duties to stop climate change. It also set out a path for organisations to bring further cases on behalf of applicants.
The Swiss verdict opens up all 46 members of the Council of Europe to similar cases in national courts that they are likely to lose.
…
The KlimaSeniorinnen, a group of 2,400 older Swiss women, told the court that several of their rights were being violated. Because older women are more likely to die in heatwaves – which have become hotter and more common because of fossil fuels – they argued that Switzerland do its share to stop the planet heating by the Paris agreement target of 1.5C (2.7F) above preindustrial levels.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/09/human-rights-violated-inaction-climate-echr-rules-landmark-case
Switzerland, which is not a member of the European Union, voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights. The EHCR in my opinion has over the years proven itself to be one of the most anti-democratic European institutions, frequently overruling the policies of elected officials.
Switzerland, with an average altitude of 1350m (4429ft) and latitude 46° North has warm summers and cold winters, but it’s not exactly a hot country. They do get occasional heatwaves. I visited Switzerland a long time ago in April, I remember I had to open my overcoat after climbing around the foothills of Grindelwalde for half a day, but the weather wasn’t exactly boiling hot.
My health advice to the KlimaSeniorinnen, if it appears to be a hot sunny summer day, you could reduce your reduce your risk of heatstroke by leaving your thermal layers at home.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
All climate/weather related deaths have declined radically in the past hundred years, so not only is there no “harm”, but a benefit.
What about the people’s right to not freeze to death during the winter?
Or people’s right not to fall when out hiking? Or people’s right not to die from cancer or people’s right to ever more wealth etc, etc?
That’s problematic as the alarmists can’t make up their minds as to whether global warming makes the winters colder or warmer.
The men are at fault…men-o-pause.
When will the ridiculousness end?
However, it may be that these people who say ridiculous things—now that they have the floor for perhaps the first time in their lives—can not put the mic down.
When will the ridiculousness end?
_________________________________
“Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” is a phrase which was coined by Chinese communist leader Mao Zedong.
These women should no longer be allowed to use any product related to ”fossil”fuels. Let’s find out how much longer they live.
With the Internet the craziness goes around to world in an instant.
All manner of craziness has burgeoned with the internet. Much more so than sanity.
Now lets watch that court try to enforce its silly ruling in non-EU Switzerland.
Its completely mad – nothing Switzerland does can have the slightest effect on global emissions. But this is a very common feature of the climate movement in the liberal Western democracies, to demand that things be done ‘because climate’ which can have no effect on it. And not to demand things be done, like China for instance getting its emissions down to 1 billion tons, which might, if the theory is correct, have a considerable effect on it.
One of the features of socialism, is the equal sharing of misery. (Except for those who run the asylum)
Can’t let one country get away with not making it’s citizens miserable.
China is doing great with Socialism with greatly increased lifespans after the US moved most of its large factories there to avoid US emission regulations.
Socialism in the US aiding the socialists in China.
What percentage of the 4% of anthropogenic CO2 was emitted by Switzerland?
What is the definition of doing enough?
Bogus litigations are more and more frequently occurring.
Switzerland does about 36 million tons a year CO2 out of a global total emissions of 37 billion tons. Probably in the error margin of measurement of the global total.
Don’t know what you mean by the 4%?
Nature emits around 30 times more CO2 than humans, so humans emit just 3% of total emissions. With increasing human emissions, it may be up to – drum roll please – 4%.
So, according to the climate cult, we’re all doomed because we increased emissions by just 4%
This is just another reason why Britain should leave the ECHR. The main reason relates to illegal mass immigration. While Britain remains in the ECHR we have virtually no control over our borders. Recent opinion polls show that a majority of Britains now want to get out of the ECHR – including myself.
Chris
That 4% is above what nature was capturing at the time, so the 4% is cumulative.
Yes, nature does catch up eventually, and had we continued to burn fossil fuels at the rate we did in 1850, then CO2 levels would have eventually stabilized.
However, the amount of fossil fuels that are being burnt kept increasing. As long as CO2 is being emitted faster than nature is able to absorb, the levels in the atmosphere will continue to increase.
So, 0.1% of 0.4%.
That certainly is worth the litigation.
Switzerland may not be a formal member of the EU , but its adopted a lot of its ‘institutions’, including the EU Human Rights court and the separate European Convention on Human rights
Its all silly goobly gook, as there doesnt seem to be enforcement provisions if a government igores them
The European court of human rights is nothing to do with the EU, it was set up as an arbiter of the European Convention on Human Rights(ECHR), which predates the old EEC.
The U.K. was subject to the Strasbourg court before it ever became a member of the EEC, and it still is despite leaving the EU.
The only connection between the ECHR and the EU is the pre-requisite to membership is that it is incorporated into law, in the U.K. that is the human rights act. Our current government are threatening to withdraw from the ECHR if certain policies on immigration are stopped by Strasbourg.
The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU. The EU does, I believe, require EU member states to be members of the ECHR but has never signed itself up to it, despite, I think, it being a treaty obligation that it should do so. But membership of the ECHR is totally independent of membership of the EU.
The ECHR, like other international bodies, was created with good intentions in post-WW2 Europe, but has outlived its usefulness. It is taking the concept of human rights to absurd proportions, as demonstrated by this case, thereby destroying its own credibility.
The fact that Switzerland is not a member of the EU is totally irrelevant. The UK has a problem with illegal immigration. We are told that some suggested solutions are barred by the ECHR. The UK is not a member of the EU. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU.
The court was remiss in not considering the huge increase Swiss life expectancy over the lifetimes of the plaintiffs. <a href=’https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/CHE/switzerland/life-expectancy’>Switzerland Life Expectancy 1950-2024</a>. http://www.macrotrends.net. Retrieved 2024-04-09.
Yes indeed, from 68 years in 1950 to 84 years in 2024!
If these women don’t want products related to ”fossil”fuels it should be no problem to no longer provide them with it. We could start tomorrow. And no energy from reservoirs because fossil fuels were used in their construction like most well insulated homes. etc etc etc
The court was remiss…. no need going beyond that point.
In other words, the court couldn’t care less about what the law actually says.
I know this won’t come as a surprise to anyone, but the UE court has declared that the EU is not a nation of laws.
To the extent that it is even possible for a government to have a conscience, that conscience should reside primarily in the legislative branch, and to a lesser degree in the executive branch.
The courts shouldn’t have any emotions at all.
Their job is to first decide if the laws that are passed, violate the constitution or not, and then whether an individual who is before the court has or has not broken one of those laws.
“Climate Change” is the new modern official state religion.
So a term with no meaning like ‘Climate Change’ now dominates our life. Now that is a Great Leap Forward.
The ECHR needs taking down a peg or three
It needs scrapping. It is destroying its own credibility by rulings such as this, and is no longer fit for purpose.
I’ve read the ruling and it contains this:
“In this case, in the light of the complexity and the nature of the issues involved, the Court found that
it could not be detailed or prescriptive as regards any measures to be implemented in order to
effectively comply with the present judgment.”
That means the judges and the expert witnesses dunno anything on the subject but it also means that if the Swiss government decides that a ‘cooldown dance’ is the way to go, that’s it and job done.
This is a Phyrrus victory
Very easy to implement. No ‘fossil fuel’ related products for these ladies.
Its one in the eye too for the usual cases like this which use ‘schoolgirls’ as plaintiffs
Similar minds, though. !
A truely stupid case brought by stupid women leading to a stupid decision!
It has come to pass:
In a progressive world you will never be progressive enough. It’s a race to the bottom. Guaranteed world destruction of coffee drinking.
Hmmm … these ladies claim they at a higher risk of death due to Global Warming?
What about those at a higher risk of death due to the “solutions” to Global Warming?
(Higher energy cost for heat and AC, food cost, etc.?)
For the $US200 trillion Bloomberg estimates it will cost to stop warming by 2050 each of the 2 billion households could have bought 100 $1,000 air conditioners
Davos, Switzerland, isn’t that where the World Economic Forum with their Great Reset ideas meet every year. Have you ever noticed the similarities between the Great Reset, Mao’s Great leap forward and Pol Pot’s Year zero?
Thats as silly as the EHRC decision
The World Economic Forum should start meeting outdoors in Switzerland in the winter each year to experience the climate first hand.
So the WEF is at least partially responsible for Switzerland’s evils?
There is no evidence that CO2 is causing heatwaves or intensifying heat waves in Switzerland, or anywhere else.
This court decision is not based on the facts, it is based on climate change propaganda.
Yes. Absurdly more people die during low temperature seasons than the summertime.
Millions more people die in the colder months than in the warmer months each year.
Clearly it’s the fault of these women for growing old.
I injured my achiles tendon the other day. Can I blame that on climate change and get compensation?
We seem to be living in a world that’s gone mad.
It’s the Internet. Craziness can spread worldwide in an instant with it.
The whole world has not gone mad, just certain segments of it.
To be specific: A certain segment of the Western World has gone mad, and that would be the radical Leftists, and they are in the process of destroying our societies, which is the aim of all radical leftists. They want to destroy current society and replace it with a radical leftwing/authoritarian way of life, i.e, slavery for you and me. So first, they have to destroy the existing society, and that’s what they are attempting to do now.
A supranational court legislating instead of governments. In the UK we got out of the EU, now we have to get out of the ECHR. Next it’ll be the WHO telling us to stay in and do as we’re told.There comes a point where democracy dies and currently now it’s by a thousand cuts..
Yet another example of mindless government. I do have a solution however. The Swiss government should withhold the source of energy for heating during the Swiss winter to all KlimaSeniorinnen members. There fixed it for you.
Even if you believe in fairies (a/k/a “climate change”) what could Switzerland do to affect it? They don’t have any fossil fuel production to speak of. More than half of their electricity is is produced by hydro power. On the consumption side,Switzerland’s population is about 1/2 of 1% of China’s or India’s.
This has to be pure virtue signaling: “message: I care”.
I for one am glad that this has come to pass.
A crazy court case upheld by an overarching legal body determining that a National government is not doing enough to ensure the well being of a specific group of people, A court case that can be used as a reference for every youth against CO2 group in their sponsored legal battle to force a government to
not build the road, `to only build turbines/solar etc is brilliant.Perhaps now the government will start to listen to other experts, to ask for a balanced discussion, to stop promoting the sticks that are being used to beat them with, to bring some sensibility into discussions.
the Dutch farmers created upheaval, the FPO in Austria caused upheaval, maybe now is the time for those in government to start thinking a little more clearly about the future and verifiable science.
Now that helps us all on this path less traveled.
What happens if they fail to address climate change? What sort of penalties will be imposed and what actions will the EU take to enforce them? The answer is that nothing will happen just as nothing has happened when individual countries have fallen short of the reductions targets they set at the various climate conferences during the past quarter-century since the Kyoto Protocol. In fact, if countries were subject to penalties for non-compliance, they wouldn’t agree to any climate deals from the outset. Nor should they because citizens of those countries shouldn’t have to pay fines to non-elected entities like the United Nations at the best of times. So these international organizations can pass judgments until the next ice age, but consumers shouldn’t have to lighten their pocketbooks to help meet any unattainable targets.
The verdict is another example of judicial activism. However, it has nothing to do whatsoever with the European Union. Not everything that has Europe on the tin, has EU in the tin. The ECHR is NOT an institution of the EU, but of the Council of Europe, which is completely separate from the EU. The UK has left the EU, but is still a member of the Council of Europe (as is Switzerland), and, as such, subject to the verdicts of the ECHR. This error plagued already (on both sides!) the Brexit discussions. There are plenty of things to complain about the EU, but this is not one of them.
What Climate change is that, in my region it has been the same the entire interglacial period.
Millions more people die each year from cold-related causes than heat-related causes.
This study from 2021 found that about 4.6 million people die each year from cold-related causes compared to about 500.000 who die from heat-related causes.
‘Global, regional, and national burden of mortality associated with non-optimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019: a three-stage modelling study’
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2542-5196%2821%2900081-4
Cold or cool weather causes our blood vessels to constrict to conserve heat. This raises our blood pressure causing increased strokes and heart attacks in the cooler months outside of the tropics.
I’m pretty sure the rates of certain sexual attacks in Sweden have increased over the last 5 years or so. Seems like the Swiss government may be complicit in the causes for that increase. Wonder when the Swiss courts will start addressing real risks to Swiss women instead of imaginary ones?
The Marxists have learned it’s easier to control the courts than the people.