Briegleb, Alice Author aut De Spiegeleir, Antoine Author aut Text xx# 2023 Verfassungsblog 2023-12-05 eng

electronic resource

remote

Computermedien

Online-Ressource

On November 30, the Brussels Court of Appeal handed down its ruling in VZW Klimaatzaak v. Kingdom of Belgium & Others, commonly known as “the Belgian climate case.” The ruling is clear: Belgian authorities failed to participate adequately in the global effort to curb global warming, and they must imperatively reduce their emissions. Subscribing fully to Matthias Petel and Norman Vander Putten’s sharp analysis of how this litigation saga embodies tensions between climate justice and the separation of powers, we wish to highlight three remarkable aspects of the case. After quickly summarizing the first instance judgment and last week’s ruling, we begin by touching on the elephant in the (court)room: the articulation of the available scientific evidence with the limits of courts’ power of review and injunction. Then, we say a word about the Brussels Court of Appeal’s thorough application of European human rights law. We finish by deploring, as did the Court, Belgian federalism’s inefficiencies. CC BY-SA 4.0 Briegleb, Alice Climate Constitutionalism Climate Crisis climate litigation Klimaatzaak 342 https://verfassungsblog.de/from-urgenda-to-klimaatzaak/ 2366-7044 Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH 10.59704/97a2e881742c2826 231205 10.59704/97a2e881742c2826 Converted from MARCXML to MODS version 3.7 using MARC21slim2MODS3-7.xsl (Revision 1.140 20200717)