Intergenerational Justice

The plaintiffs, a group of senior women, argue that climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, including the elderly. Their case emphasises the responsibility of the current generation to act for the sake of future generations. By holding the Swiss government accountable for its climate obligations, they aim to protect the rights of both current and future citizens.

Legal Framework and Innovation

This case represents a novel approach within climate litigation by directly involving senior citizens, particularly women, who have been underrepresented in previous cases. By using existing human rights frameworks, the plaintiffs challenged the federal government's inadequate climate policies, asserting that these policies violate their rights and the rights of future generations.

Health and Vulnerability

The lawsuit underscores the potential health impacts of climate change on vulnerable populations, especially the elderly. Extreme weather events, heatwaves, and other climate-related issues pose significant risks to their health and well-being. This aspect of the case makes a compelling argument that climate inaction has real and immediate consequences for senior citizens.

Raising Public Awareness

The case gained significant media attention and public support, raising awareness about the urgency of climate action. By highlighting the specific experiences and needs of senior women, the case brings visibility to the intersection of aging, gender, and environmental issues, initiating wider discussions on climate change and its diverse impacts.

Encouraging Further Legal Action

KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz serves as a potential model for similar legal actions in other jurisdictions, showcasing how different demographics can engage in climate litigation, the case may inspire other groups, whether based on age, gender, or other criteria, to pursue legal avenues for climate accountability in their countries.

Connection to Global Trends

The case aligns with a broader global trend of increasing climate litigation aimed at holding governments accountable for failing to meet climate commitments. As more cases are brought by various groups, it emphasises a global movement towards using judicial mechanisms to enforce climate action and protect human rights.

Conclusion

The Court found that Switzerland failed to comply with its positive obligations under the Convention concerning climate change and there were critical gaps in establishing a relevant domestic regulatory framework, including through a carbon budget or national GHG emissions limitations.

On March 6, 2025, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe decided that Switzerland is not yet complying with the requirements of the ECtHR judgment in the case of the KlimaSeniorinnen[2]. Switzerland has yet to prove that it is doing enough to align its policy with a maximum global warming limit of 1.5°C. Specifically, the CMDH "invited also the authorities to further demonstrate that the methodology used to devise, develop and implement the relevant legislative and administrative framework responds to the Convention requirements as detailed by the Court and relies on a quantification, through a carbon budget or otherwise, of national greenhouse gas emissions limitations"