Judges trying to punish governments for not controlling present or future weather is an absurdity ripe for knocking on the head. In any case, Swiss glaciers have advanced and retreated in the past with no input from the government or anyone else, so local climate variation is nothing new.
– – –
BERN (Reuters) -The lower house of the Swiss parliament voted on Wednesday to reject a ruling ordering Switzerland to do more to combat global warming in a move that could encourage others to resist the influence of international courts, reports Swissinfo.ch.
In April, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg issued an unprecedented judgment that said Bern had violated the human rights of a group of older Swiss women, the KlimaSeniorinnen, by failing to tackle climate change.
But Bern’s lower house on Wednesday followed in the steps of the upper house and passed a non-binding motion with 111 votes in favour and 72 against blasting the court’s “judicial activism”.
It argued there was no reason to take further action because Switzerland, warming at more than twice the global rate [Talkshop comment – no evidence presented], was already doing enough.
During the debate, lawmakers denounced the court’s “interference” in Swiss democracy and one called the Strasbourg ruling “erroneous” as several older women who brought the case looked on.
One of the members of parliament from the right-wing Swiss People’s Party, which is the biggest party in parliament, appeared to mock the women, criticising them for bringing a case “because they are a bit too hot in the summer”.
Michael Graber, from the Valais canton, was referring to their argument that the government’s inadequate climate policies put them at risk of dying during heatwaves.
Full report here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Huh, don’t we just see that ( judicial activism ) appearing quietly all over the world, aided & abetted by the MSM ?
For justice to be truly just a secular technological society should always apply the laws of physics and the reality of observations in deciding legal cases, when these are available and applicable.
To decide such matters in law, based on what people believe, effectively preferring circumstantial evidence to direct evidence of the facts and physics, is a denial of all the progress made since the enlightenment.
Yet most of judges making these judgements have no qualifications in, or understanding of, the absolute realities of science and technology, and are happy to trust the evidentially wrong, unqualified and generally politicised science opinions of self declared experts, unchallenged by better evidence to the contrary from real experts.
There is a wall of reasonable doubt from the measured observational evidence regarding the amount of climate change that is caused by human activity, and that which was caused by natural change in the past, hence what is normal, eternal, and known to geology. The judges seem unaware of this simple reality, even content to deny it, because the politicians passed laws saying its real. Falsely on the facts. The fact the evidence says otherwise does not bother them.
If judges purport to represent justice then it should bother them, because the actually fraudulent laws imposed in its name, regarding the false in fact claims regarding additional atmospheric CO2 as a net problem that must be taxed away, and the denial of established and optimal forms of transport, heating and other energy uses by law, fundamental to the economic activity and social organisation of a developed society, ipso facto have massive negative effects on the finances and freedoms of the governed. I think that covers it.
Something’s amiss, as Shakespeare might write.
The judicial system has been captured by the Marxists too – its high time all institutions were cleared of the socialist scourge planning and plotting the demise of western capitalism and regression of associated living standards
Institutions like the Ag Engineers, and other Engineers AND the NFU… going by their Magazine content ” Content not policy blah blah blah” but the Big Shots like to bump their gums. Yes, aren’t academic types supposed to be Left wingers.hmmm Maybe the vocational ones are more pragmatic otherwise in politics …. I dunno, just NEVER ever thought that farmers would vote themselves for Christmas … Hmm, maybe I got the wrong end – Santa bringing PRESENTS / GIFTS ! Aye.
Yes indeed – been a victim of such justice … and now we have 20’s plenty – AFTER a long campaign to get tractors to travel faster. And then ONLY 40MPH allowed for HGVs on our Sole Trunk Road (A9) in this area N of Inverness. Other trunk roads you can be chased by HGVs on the waggly stretches, ducking under the bushes on the verges. …..
brianrlcatt, you miss the point. There was only a case because the ECHR believes there is a “right” to not be exposed to the supposed higher risks of heatwaves. This is not physics, it is absurd over-extension of the concept of “rights”. Indeed, since it is far more obvious that hypothermia kills, it ought to be possible to bring a case against governments that make heating a home in winter harder via boiler bans. But the ECHR wouldn’t dream of allowing that because it is a wholly political court. And that is why the Left scream if anybody suggests the UK should leave it.
Brianrlcatt, That should be the laws of engineering. Thermodynamics is engineering. In many ways shown through experience by engineers making tools, buildings, smelting metals, etc. Louis Carnot ( French Engineer) was one of the first to write about Thermodynamics Ca 1800. His engineer son Sadi Carnot is regarded as the father of Thermodynamics. I have read that practically no scientist understand Dimensional Analysis which was developed by engineers around 1900. Many science equations are dimensionally incorrect and that applies to all the equations (and models) in “climate science”. I believe one of Einsteins equation concerning relativity is dimensionally wrong.
Critics of the N & Z paper about pressure and temperature did not understand dimensional analysis and dimensionless numbers. How many here understand the Reynolds or Prandtl numbers.