The case has brought Sophie Baxon, 21, who fears it will engulf her family’s farm in low-lying Pelworm Island if the sea level rises further.

Along with a number of interested citizens and support from environmental organizations such as Greenpeace, the German government has risen to the Constitutional Court. Their main argument: German climate law is too vague. Germany strives for climate neutrality, but the law makes no mention of efforts needed to achieve this after 2030.

Citizens’ freedoms may be threatened

The German Constitutional Court follows this logic. The disputed provisions violate the freedoms of the complainants, and some of them are still young. The provisions will irreversibly shift a significant burden in terms of emissions restrictions to the post-2030 period, it states Rule.

Achieving the Paris climate goals will require faster and more urgent cuts after 2030, the court says, and these future commitments will affect “nearly every form of freedom.”

After all, nearly all aspects of human life are linked to greenhouse gas emissions, the court says, and so citizens’ freedoms are likely to be threatened by strict restrictions beyond 2030.

The ruling stated, “That is why the legislator had to take the necessary precautions to alleviate these great burdens and thus guarantee the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.” “The legal provisions for adjusting the pathway for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from 2031 are not sufficient to achieve the necessary transition to climate neutrality in time.”

It will be before the German government until the end of next year to tighten the law.

The case of the Belgian climate

In the Netherlands, too, the climate issue has forced the government to kneel three times. After a first ruling in 2015 and an appeal in 2018, the Supreme Court finally ruled against the Dutch government at the end of 2019.

German rule is a new impetus for the Belgian climate issue. “The German court affirms that the negligent climate policy violates human and children’s rights, as we argued in our request,” said Carol Bellet, a lawyer at Climate Case, in a first response. “We see this issue as an important precedent in our interest.”

The decision on the Belgian climate issue is expected in the first week of July.

The case has been brought by Sophie Baxen, 21, who fears her family’s farm on the low-lying island of Belwerme will be swallowed up if the sea level rises further, and she, along with a number of concerned citizens and support from environmental organizations such as Greenpeace, have challenged the German government before the Constitutional Court. Their main argument: German climate law is too vague. Germany strives for climate neutrality, but the law does not specify the efforts needed to achieve this beyond 2030, and the German Constitutional Court follows that logic. The disputed provisions violate the freedoms of the complainants, and some of them are still young. The rulings will irreversibly shift a significant burden in terms of emissions restrictions into the post-2030 period, ”the ruling states. Achieving the Paris climate goals will require faster and more urgent reductions after 2030, the court says, and these future commitments will affect“ every form of Forms of freedom. ” After all, nearly all aspects of human life are linked to greenhouse gas emissions, the court says, and thus citizens’ freedoms are likely to be threatened by severe restrictions after 2030. Therefore, the legislator had to take precautions to mitigate These are the main burdens, and thus to guarantee the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution. ” “ The legal provisions for adjusting the pathway for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from 2031 are not sufficient to achieve the necessary transition to climate neutrality in time. “It will be up to the German government until the end of next year to tighten the law. On his knees up to three times. After the first ruling in 2015 and the appeal in 2018, the Supreme Court finally ruled against the Dutch government at the end of 2019. The German ruling is a fresh impetus for the Belgian climate case. “The German court affirms that the negligent climate policy violates human and children’s rights, as we argued in our claim,” said Carol Bellet, a lawyer at Climate Case, in a first response. “We see this case as an important precedent for us,” he added. The decision on the Belgian climate case is expected in the first week of July.