Should governments and companies be legally obligated to protect people from climate change?
Introduction to the media issue
Video clip at right: On May 28, 2021, SBS News televised a report on the ruling of an Australian federal court that the Environment Minister had a duty of care to protect young Australians from climate change.What they said...
'Children rely upon the Minister to avoid the potential harm they face'
Federal Court Justice Mordecai Bromberg ruling that the Minister for the Environment has a duty of care to protect Australian children from climate change
'No government can deliver solutions when its people are unable to recognise them or unwilling to accept them'
Dale Jamieson, professor of environmental studies and philosophy at New York University, commenting on the electorate's responsibility to support sound climate change policy
The issue at a glance
On May 27, 2021, the Federal Court of Australia ruled that the Minister for the Environment had a duty of care to protect Australian children from mining developments that contributed to climate change.
On May 26, 2021, a court in the Netherlands found that the multinational oil company Royal Dutch Shell must reduce its CO2 emissions by 45 percent relative to 2019 levels. The ruling, which has application only in the Netherlands, attempts to impose an obligation on the company to protect the human rights of Dutch citizens from the harmful climate impacts caused by the sale of Shell products.
These developments have contributed to the debate over the role of courts in determining the policies governments and corporations should adopt to reduce climate change.