Dutch citizens sue government over climate change

Posted: April 16, 2015 by oldbrew in climate, Energy, government, Legal
Tags: , ,

Dutch Parliament buildings [credit: Wikipedia]

Dutch Parliament buildings [credit: Wikipedia]

Any guesses how this one’s likely to go? The idea that humans can control temperature changes is about as absurd as the idea that they are the main cause of them, as large fluctuations in long-term climate records clearly show. The prospect of maximum temperatures being set by law is risible – but in theory it could happen.

Phys.org reports: Around 900 Dutch citizens on Tuesday took their government to court in a bid to force a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and take action against climate change.

“We want the Dutch government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by 2020 compared to 1990 levels,” said Majan Missema, head of rights group Urgenda which is coordinating the legal action.

The group says the case is the first in Europe in which citizens attempt to hold a state responsible for its potentially devastating inaction and the first in the world in which human rights are used as a legal basis to protect citizens against climate change.

The plaintiffs have asked judges to rule that a rise in global temperatures of over two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) would be a human rights infraction.

The international community has agreed to peg global warming to 2C over pre-industrial levels.

More than 200 of the citizens who brought the suit attended the first hearing in The Hague on Tuesday, including teachers, business people, musicians and artists.

There has been increasing interest in using lawsuits against governments and companies to press for action on climate change over the last decade.

Countries are to publish their own undertakings to reduce greenhouse gas emissions ahead of a hoped-for global deal to be agreed in Paris in December.

The 28-member European Union has said it will reduce emissions by 40 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2030, while the world’s second largest polluter after China, the United States, has said it wants to reduce emissions by between 26-28 percent by 2025.

“We can’t wait for politicians to reach agreement, we need urgent action” said Minnesma.

“Sometimes a court can end a great abuse despite the existing political status quo,” she said.

A court ruling possibly forcing the Dutch government to prioritise reducing greenhouse gas emissions is expected on June 24.

Phys.org report: Dutch citizens sue government over climate change.

  1. ivan says:

    And what happens if the court has a flush of common sense and rules the global warming is nothing more than natural variation in the climate which mankind can do absolutly nothing about.

  2. graphicconception says:

    It sounds super-stupid to me.

    If you don’t like the government then don’t vote for them.

    If they were sued and the government lost, what then?
    They could be subject to a massive fine. So taxes will be raised to pay for it.
    They could be forced to leave office. So they would not have a government.
    They might get locked up. Still nothing would be fixed.

    Why don’t the people just stop using fossil fuels? Easy!
    Why does it always need to be someone else’s fault?

  3. oldbrew says:

    If the Dutch government wants to defend itself it could point out that global temperatures haven’t done anything much for nearly 20 years – contrary to all the supposed experts – so what’s the big deal, judge?

  4. oldbrew says:

    Leading warmist professor admits we’re cooling – but even more warming will be along later because ‘we say so’ 😉

    Who believes this nonsense any more?


  5. Graeme No.3 says:

    “Who believes this nonsense any more?” The 900 gullibles wasting the Judge’s time.

    [reply] Useful idiots?

  6. ntesdorf says:

    Insanity is becoming an increasingly widespread problem in the World and Holland is spearheading the epidemic. The source of the problem seems to be the U.N. Building in New York.

  7. Boyfromtottenham says:

    Hi from Oz. So what next – suing the government for not preventing rain on my wedding day? I hope the judge throws it out and awards costs against these 900 boofheads.

  8. steverichards1984 says:

    This should be a lesson to all skeptics, even some reasonably bright people believe all of the hype in the media. The idea that skeptics should be warm and cuddly and let the facts win is disproven by this sort of nonsense.

    As has been stated elsewhere many times, it take a great deal of force and effort to ‘overcome’ beliefs.

    Battered wives returning for more mistreatment;

    Damaged cult members not wanting to leave.

    The size of the task, I believe, is woefully underestimated.

    The degree of false programming is truly immense. All of the media, each and every day, new, current affairs, soap operas, dramas continues a drip drip feed of man made warming.

    So much so, it would seem odd to expect many to be immune too it!

    I think we need to fight hard to correct this ill of modern society.

  9. hunter says:

    This could very well be a pre-arranged faux lawsuit. This is common in the US when the EPA wants to push through some new non-scientific bit of bs regulation: The EPA finds a plaintiff.The two conspire to go to court over an issue. Instead of an actual trial of the facts, they have a pre-arranged agreement that is entered into the Court as a negotiated settlement. The Court rubber stamps the agreement, giving it force of law without any legislation or even bureaucratic pro-forma of submission for public review.

  10. smamarver says:

    Well, that’s a big step in the fight against global warming and greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 emissions have been the subject for many debates in the last 20-30 years and governments promised to reduce the gas emissions, but I’m not really sure that the data they present are 100% accurate and that their promises are having a real base. Still, I know that their are not only the greenhouse gas emissions the ones that influence our climate; oceans play an important role, also, the most important after the sun, in my opinion, and I think that we should pay much more attention to them and to the way that human activity on the sea/ocean influence the climate change. For example, I recently read that some groups and NGO’s opposed to the idea of building offshore wind-parks in their region. I also have read an analysis on that subject: http://1ocean-1climate.com/, maybe you’ll get the time to read it and tell me your opinion.

  11. Ian G says:

    Maybe the power companies should just close down for two months of the year – this would achieve the protestors aims.

    [reply] their ideal target is 12 months a year