Inter-Judicial Dialogue on Climate Change and Human Rights
This symposium brings together judges, practitioners, and scholars from the European, Inter-American, and African regional human rights systems to examine climate change as a human rights challenge, tracing shared legal questions, divergent doctrinal responses, and the growing importance of inter-judicial dialogue in shaping transnational climate justice.
Both the conference and this symposium would not have been possible without the generous support from the Zukunftsfonds of the Republic of Austria, Central European University, and the Vienna Centre for Migration & Law.
The forthcoming climate advisory opinion presents a historic opportunity for the AfCHPR to articulate a coherent and comprehensive African rights-based framework for climate governance. Given Africa’s particular vulnerability to climate change, the need for such guidance is especially pressing. By clarifying States’ obligations under the African Charter, the Arusha judges can strengthen climate accountability across the region and provide guidance to policymakers and domestic courts.
Continue reading >>
Climate change has reached the dockets of (international) courts. The intersecting nature of this existential threat has led to a flurry of judicial action – somewhat paradoxically in the absence of meaningful political action. Yet, as case law is proliferating, the discussion about climate change in international adjudication has become highly specialized. Against this background, this contribution shares observations on the emergence of regional climate change law and calls for taking this regional perspective seriously by extending it beyond what is traditionally understood as inter-judicial dialogue.
Continue reading >>
The relationship between the world's regional human rights courts has undergone a quiet but consequential transformation over the past decade. What began as occasional, informal exchanges among judges and registries — encounters at conferences, the mutual citation of landmark judgments, coordinated submissions to United Nations human rights bodies — has matured into something more deliberate and structurally significant. This blog post examines that transformation from the perspective of the Inter-American Court by attending closely to the three dimensions in which cooperation actually operates.
Continue reading >>
What are the major interpretative principles which assist the European Court of Human Rights in its decision-making? What role do they play in climate change judgments? Subsidiarity, the living instrument doctrine and a harmonious interpretation of international law all enable the Court to incorporate relevant comparative law into its reasoning. Climate change case-law is particularly well-suited to the comparative law approach and I argue that the role of comparative law can potentially have more impact in this emerging area of the law than in others.
Continue reading >>
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has just handed climate litigators in Latin America the most powerful tool they have ever had. Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 restructures the procedural architecture of climate litigation: inverting burdens of proof, authorising the presumption of causal links between state emissions and climate harm, and recognising satellite imagery as evidence that states must make accessible to victims. For organisations that have spent years fighting for communities on the front lines of the climate emergency, this is a transformative moment.
Continue reading >>
This blog post takes the landmark ruling KlimaSeniorinnen as a starting point to examine the role of procedural rights in climate litigation before the European Court of Human Rights. Procedural rights, as we argue, can be understood in a twofold manner: on the one hand, as admissibility criteria structuring access to the Court, and on the other, as substantive guarantees flowing from the Convention itself. Read in this light, KlimaSeniorinnen – alongside Greenpeace Nordic – reveals key developments in the Court’s emerging climate jurisprudence across both dimensions.
Continue reading >>
In July 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued Advisory Opinion 32/25 on the Climate Emergency and Human Rights: it recognized the right to a healthy climate as a standalone human right, declared a jus cogens norm prohibiting irreversible environmental harm, and affirmed the legal personhood of nature. These are not incremental developments. They are structural shifts in international environmental law, and they are the culmination of more than two decades of jurisprudential construction. This post traces that arc.
Continue reading >>
The relationship between climate change and human rights has occupied international legal scholarship for more than two decades. Yet for much of that period, the relationship remained largely aspirational — acknowledged in soft-law instruments and scholarly commentary, but only partially operationalized by binding international adjudication. Advisory Opinion OC-32/25, adopted by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR or the Court) on May 29, 2025, marks a decisive shift in that landscape.
Continue reading >>
Müllner v Austria is more than just a sequel to KlimaSeniorinnen. It has the potential to become a pivotal case for the Court’s developing climate jurisprudence, particularly as regards individual victim status, the scope of States’ positive obligations, and the position of EU climate law within the Convention framework.
Continue reading >>
On 9 April 2024, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered rulings in three climate-change cases, thus becoming the first international court to establish a right to be protected from the effects of climate change. The leading judgment was Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland. Now, two years after the KlimaSeniorinnen precedent, we can perhaps begin to take stock of its implications and its progeny.
Continue reading >>
Climate change is not only an environmental or scientific issue – it is fundamentally a human rights challenge. Across jurisdictions and legal traditions, courts are increasingly being called upon to respond to their complex and far-reaching impacts on our human rights. This symposium brings together reflections from judges, practitioners, and scholars from the three regional human rights systems, based on presentations delivered at a conference held at Central European University in cooperation with the University of Vienna on 17 April 2026.
Continue reading >>
