Wednesday , March 29 2023

She's in the censer about Urgenda


The Dutch state goes to the Supreme Court in the Urgenda case. Minister Eric Wiebes (Economic and Climate Affairs, VVD) announced on Friday. It was already known that the government planned to enter the clerk.

The Hague Court of Appeal earlier ruled that the state should do more to reduce CO emissions2 to counteract. Because of this statement, the government feels limited to the freedom itself to determine how much the reduction should be. The move to the Supreme Court is a matter of principle, Wiebes said after the Council of Ministers. "Because we want to know, to the highest degree, whether a judge can sit on the political seat to such an extent."

In a letter to the House of Representatives, Wiebes writes that the government "continues to lead" to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25% by 2020, as Urgenda says. Experts, however, barely consider this goal feasible.

Urgenda's director, Marjan Minnesma, is not surprised by the cabinet's decision to appeal. "The government has always said its defense is just a matter of principle." He calls it "no longer credible". Since 2015, when Urgenda first won, greenhouse gas emissions have not fallen substantially, Minnesma reports. "If the state were only concerned about the principle, the government has already taken major steps to limit emissions."

Climate change is a real and serious threat to citizens need to be protected, the Hague court decided last month. According to the court, there was an international consensus on the reduction of CO by 25%2greenhouse gas emissions are very little needed against climate change and that two fundamental fundamental rights are at stake if emissions are not sufficiently reduced. The court has mentioned the right to life and the right to a private or family life, from the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Government believes that this reasoning, where international agreements are essential, can have "major consequences" for climate policy, but also for "other policy choices."

The Supreme Court will examine the case. The highest administrative judge only establishes whether the law and procedural rules have been correctly applied.

In 2015, the sustainable Urgenda organization approached a case against the Dutch state. The approach to this process was to let the government do more against climate change. In court, Urgenda was right in the first instance, after which the state appealed. In October, the Hague court again approved the Urgenda Foundation. The Urgenda judgment is internationally applicable as revolutionary. For the first time, a state has had to make greater efforts against climate change. Current policy is not enough for Urgenda. Marjan Minnesma: "We have commissioned research showing that emissions will be reduced by only 15% by 2020." The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency also pointed out that the decrease in CO2emissions, partly due to strong economic growth.

Source link