.
ER Editor: It was a ridiculous case to begin with that could have spelled trouble for national government policy. Those with no backbone, that is. See —
Switzerland “Violated Human Rights” By Not Tackling Climate-Change Quickly Enough, ECHR Rules In Landmark Case
Here’s the follow-up. The Swiss Parliament simply said ‘no’. As the Guardian piece notes,
The vote comes days after the far-right scored sizable gains in European Union elections.
From the site GreenQueen, readers may be interested in this outraged piece —
‘Betrayal’: Swiss Parliament Rejects European Court’s Landmark Climate Change Ruling
What Switzerland’s politicians have voted through is extraordinary – no member state of the Council of Europe (which the ECHR belongs to), has ever refused to implement a judgement.
While the decision had been adopted by the upper house of the parliament, the lower house voted to disregard it. With 111 votes in favour and 72 against, the lawmakers accused the ECHR of “inadmissible and disproportionate judicial activism”.
********
A panel of Strasbourg judges ruled in April that Switzerland had violated the human rights of older women through weak climate policies that leave them more vulnerable to heatwaves. Activists hailed the judgment as a breakthrough because it leaves all members of the Council of Europe exposed to legal challenges for sluggish efforts to clean up carbon-intensive economies.
But the Swiss Parliament’s lower house voted on Wednesday to disregard the ruling – with 111 votes in favour and 72 against – arguing that the judges had overstepped their bounds and that Switzerland had done enough. The declaration, which has been adopted by the upper house but does not bind the federal Government, accused the court of “inadmissible and disproportionate judicial activism”.
“This is terrible from a rule-of-law perspective,” said Corina Heri, a law researcher at the University of Zürich, adding that “the whole system would fall apart” if lots of states started to pick and choose which rulings they complied with. “The term ‘slippery slope’ is overused, obviously, but it is a dangerous precedent to create.”
The KlimaSeniorinnen – or Swiss female climate elders – are a group of 2,400 women over the age of 65 who took the Swiss Government to court for failing to do its fair share to stop the planet heating [sic] 1.5°C (2.7°F). After years of setbacks in regional and national courts, they escalated the case to Europe’s top human rights court and scored a partial victory.
But in a fiery debate on Wednesday, Swiss politicians attacked the court and mocked the women.
Jean-Luc Addor, from the Right-wing populist Swiss People’s Party, the largest in the federal assembly, said: “These ‘climate elder’ are just a bunch of apparently healthy ‘boomeuses’ [female boomers], who are trying to deny our children the living conditions they have enjoyed all their lives.”
You see, Tories. You can just ignore the European court and the sky doesn’t fall in. After all, it’s often just a bunch of souped-up Leftist activists with law degrees.
Worth reading in full.
Source
Featured image source:
************
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
