scholarly journals Climate Change and the Ageing Population: Enforcing the Rights to Life and Health Under Human Rights, Health and Climate Change Regimes

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saheed A. Alabi
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Climate Impact ◽  
Ageing Population ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Healthy Environment ◽  
Climate Impact Assessment ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Potential Methods ◽  
The Right

This article explores potential methods of protecting the ageing population from the consequences of climate change. It discusses the enforcement of the "right to life" (the right to live a life free from environmental degradation) and/or health relating to the environment in protection of the ageing population. Many countries have codified the right to life and/or health in their constitutions. In order to enjoy this right, it is essential that a clean and healthy environment be secured.Thus, this article assesses the consideration of climate change by international human rights and health regimes. It also examines whether climate obligations such as emissions reduction, climate impact assessment, mitigation and adaptation can be enforced through these regimes. The article suggests that expanding the purview of new international climate policies that address the public health of the ageing population will fill the absence of health policies under the climate regime. Finally, after proposing that climate litigation through human rights enforcement may reshape global responses to adverse effects of climate change on the ageing population, the article suggests additional ways to achieve such feats.

scholarly journals Human Rights and Global Environment

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-113
Author(s):  
Flora Pricilla Kalalo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Healthy Life ◽  
Healthy Environment ◽  
The Right

Human rights and the environment are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. The concern of a group of people for the environment is not enough because changes in an environment have an impact not only locally, but often globally. Therefore it can be said that in countries where there are many violations of human rights, environmental damage often occurs. What happened then was that the human right to have a healthy life (the right to a healthy environment) was violated or sidelined. In addition, development that is not controlled can result in human rights being violated. Regulations regarding human rights are not entirely related to environmental protection. However, if you pay attention, there are several articles in some of these provisions that can be used as a legal basis for taking various actions aimed at protecting the environment. On the other hand, regulation of environmental protection at the same time means respect for human rights, especially with regard to issues of the right to life, health problems, disturbance of their property to respect for indigenous peoples' rights.

scholarly journals THE RIGHT TO A BALANCED AND HEALTHFUL ECOLOGY IN THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND CASE LAW OF THE ECtHR

2022 ◽  
Vol 20 (33) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Elena Evgenyevna Guliaeva
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Environmental Rights ◽  
Healthy Environment ◽  
Favorable Environment ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

Objective:The author seeks to understand the content and legal guarantees of the right to sustainable, healthy and favorable environment in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. The researcher seeks to list the case law of the ECtHR corresponding to environmental issues in order to define concrete aspects related to responsibility of the States for the climate change and global warming. The author analyzes new legal trends on the protection of the rights of individuals and groups to complain for violations of their rights to a healthy and favorable environment in the light of the European Convention on Human Rights. The article is focused on positive state obligations on a healthy and sustainable environment under the Convention provisions, Russian experience in eco-cases, admissibility criteria for complaints to the European Court of Human Rights in “environmental cases”. The writer gives an overview of the ECtHR’s legal positions on the right to a healthy and favorable (i.e. prosperous, clean, safe, quiet, calm, quality) environment by type of its pollution. The author considers the importance of facilitating the right to healthy environment according to the UN Sustainable Development Goals.Methodology: The research uses general scientific and special cognitive techniques wherein legal analysis and synthesis, systemic, formal-legal, comparative-legal, historical-legal and dialectical methods are applied. The author applied a case study method to select the most recent and pilot cases of the ECtHR practice.Results: The author founds out that despite the fact of a non-exhaustive list of the legal positions of the ECtHR concerning the environment effect on human life and health, there is a certain trend in Council of Europe towards an extended interpretation of the human right to healthy ecological situation responding to new challenges to the realization that right, such as, the decarbonization of industrial processes, right to light, right to fresh air, clean water and clean atmosphere, etc. The study concludes with an idea that right to sustainable, healthy and favorable right is a collective right. From the practical perspective, potentially group of individuals should complain to the international judicial institutions to the violation of this right. The importance of the protection of that right is increasing within the technological progress. The right to healthy environment imposes to the European States a legal obligation to ensure right to life, prohibition of torture, right to privacy, right to a fair trial, right to an effective remedy and prohibition of discrimination. The researcher also point out that cases of environmental rights violations are complicated in terms of preparing a complaint and processing by the ECtHR. Due to this fact, it is hard to do so with regard to the causal link between the acts (omission) of state agencies, the violation of environmental rights and the consequences that occurred. It is not clear from the text of the Convention which article directly should be applied.Contributions: Following a review of the content, the author raised possible problems, strategies, suggestions and guidelines for the protection of the right to sustainable and healthy environment. The author concluded that near future new categories of legal cases related to the state responsibility for global warming and climate change will appear in international and national judicial system. The author encourages the complement to the international legal regulation of the protection of the right to healthy, sustainable and favorable ecology on universal and regional level.

scholarly journals Тhe Right to a Healthy Climate as a Function of the Right to Life UDK 342.7:502.131.1

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 27
Author(s):  
Temelko Risteski ◽  
Elena Todorova ◽  
Sejdefa Džafče ◽  
Anita Gligorova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Southeast Europe ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Nature Protection ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Physiological Functions ◽  
Healthy Environment ◽  
The Right

Objective: To define the concept of healthy climate and in this regard to determine the relationship between the right to healthy environment and right to life, as top human right, from a legal and ethical aspects.Results: Analysis of international legislation on environment, climate and human rights, and laws on nature protection, environment and other environmental laws of the Republic of Macedonia and other countries of Southeast Europe, based on the facts of climate change, shows that these changes affect the quality of life and therefore the exercise of the right to a healthy life.Conclusion: The right to life is top human right. All other human rights are subordinate to it. It is healthy climate in which the weather as a meteorological phenomenon is mostly compatible with the physiological states of human organisms, most of the average healthy people, and allows normal physiological functions. Normal physiological functions of the organism has a direct impact on human health. Human health is directly in function of life. It makes life healthy and happy. Only healthy and happy life is a real human life. All the troubles in life can be overcome if the person is healthy. It is a notorious fact. Thus, the right to a healthy climate is in function of the right to life.

The Grounds of Climate Justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 41-57
Author(s):  
Alix Dietzel
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Right To Health ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Climate Justice ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Right To Food ◽  
The Right

Chapter Two defines the grounds of climate justice. Defining the grounds of justice is a key task for any climate justice account because it allows readers to understand what must be normatively prioritised. The grounds of justice in this sense represent the moral underpinnings of the climate justice account, a normative subfloor that must not be crossed. The chapter makes the case for using the human right to health as the non-relational moral minimum that grounds the climate justice position. Chapter Two puts forward that the human right to health provides a strong foundation for a climate justice because it captures the threats climate change poses to humans more comprehensively than other key human rights, including the right to food and water, the right to life, and the right to free movement.

scholarly journals THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 735-752
Author(s):  
Ginevra Le Moli
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time ◽  
Threat To Life

AbstractIn its August 2019 decision in Portillo Cáceres v Paraguay, the Human Rights Committee recognised, for the first time, the existence of a connection between environmental protection and the right to life with dignity. This is not only a landmark decision for the Committee but also represents the consolidation of a body of case law and practice from the three regional human rights courts and other UN human rights bodies which has developed over the last quarter of a century. It also shows the potential of two important and widely debated paragraphs in the newly adopted General Comment No. 36 on the Right to Life, which describe environmental degradation as both an enabler of threats and a direct threat to the right to life. Such potential has been confirmed in another landmark decision of the HRC—Teitiota v New Zealand, relating to climate change as threat to life. This article draws on Portillo Cáceres v Paraguay and Teitiota v New Zealand to analyse this wider field of practice in order to clarify the connection between the right to life and environmental protection, as recognised by the Committee, and considers its potential impact on future litigation.

Briefly Noted

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 888-889
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Sea Level ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Right

In January 2020, the UN Human Rights Committee ruled that states cannot deport people who face “climate change-induced conditions that violate the right to life.” According to a UN press release, the complaint in this case was filed by Ioane Teitiota who was denied asylum in New Zealand and deported with his family to his native Kiribati. Following his deportation, he filed a complaint with the Human Rights Committee, alleging that his deportation violated his right to life and that the rise of the sea level and other climate change impacts rendered Kiribati uninhabitable. Though the Committee determined that, on the facts, Mr. Teitiota's right to life was not violated, the Committee specifically indicated that “"this ruling sets forth new standards that could facilitate the success of future climate change-related asylum claims.” In particular, the Committee determined that asylum seekers need not demonstrate that they would face imminent harm if returned to their home states because the negative effects of climate change can occur suddenly and more slowly, over the longer-term.

Climate Change and Global Health

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 219-229
Author(s):  
Stefania Negri
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
The Right

Abstract Climate change is considered potentially the greatest threat to global health in the 21st century due to its direct and indirect adverse impacts on human health and its environmental determinants. Synergies between international regimes regulating climate change and human rights protection can provide the appropriate legal tools to hold States responsible for their contribution to climate change, notably in terms of failure to adopt effective and appropriate measures of mitigation and adaptation capable of preventing climate-induced health risks. In this respect, recent trends in international practice suggest that the right to health argument has the potential to play a pivotal role in climate litigation before international courts and human rights bodies, which are increasingly called to adjudge complaints filed by youth petitioners fighting for global climate change action.

KEBIJAKAN MODERASI PIDANA MATI

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Mei Susanto ◽  
Ajie Ramdan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Moderation Model ◽  
The Right

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 2-3/PUU-V/2007 selain menjadi dasar konstitusionalitas pidana mati, juga memberikan jalan tengah (moderasi) terhadap perdebatan antara kelompok yang ingin mempertahankan (retensionis) dan yang ingin menghapus (abolisionis) pidana mati. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam putusan a quo dikaitkan dengan teori pemidanaan dan hak asasi manusia dan bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 dikaitkan dengan putusan a quo. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian doktrinal, dengan menggunakan bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, berupa peraturan perundang-undangan, literatur, dan hasil-hasil penelitian yang relevan dengan objek penelitian. Penelitian menyimpulkan, pertama, putusan a quo yang memuat kebijakan moderasi pidana mati telah sesuai dengan teori pemidanaan khususnya teori integratif dan teori hak asasi manusia di Indonesia di mana hak hidup tetap dibatasi oleh kewajiban asasi yang diatur dengan undang-undang. Kedua, model kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 beberapa di antaranya telah mengakomodasi amanat putusan a quo, seperti penentuan pidana mati di luar pidana pokok, penundaan pidana mati, kemungkinan pengubahan pidana mati menjadi pidana seumur hidup atau penjara paling lama 20 tahun. Selain itu masih menimbulkan persoalan berkaitan dengan lembaga yang memberikan pengubahan pidana mati, persoalan grasi, lamanya penundaan pelaksanaan pidana mati, dan jenis pidana apa saja yang dapat diancamkan pidana mati.Kata kunci: kebijakan, KUHP, moderasi, pidana mati. ABSTRACTConstitutional Court’s Decision Number 2-3/PUU-V/2007, in addition to being the basis of the constitutionality of capital punishment, also provides a moderate way of arguing between retentionist groups and those wishing to abolish the death penalty (abolitionist). The problem in this research is how the moderation policy of capital punishment in aquo decision is associated with the theory of punishment and human rights and how the moderation policy of capital punishment in the draft Criminal Code of 2015 (RKUHP) is related with the a quo decision. This study is doctrinal, using primary and secondary legal materials, in the form of legislation, literature and research results that are relevant to the object of analysis. This study concludes, firstly, the aquo decision containing the moderation policy of capital punishment has been in accordance with the theory of punishment, specificallyy the integrative theory and the theory of human rights in Indonesia, in which the right to life remains limited by the fundamental obligations set forth in the law. Secondly, some of the modes of moderation model of capital punishment in RKUHP of 2015 have accommodated the mandate of aquo decision, such as the determination of capital punishment outside the main punishment, postponement of capital punishment, the possibility of converting capital punishment to life imprisonment or imprisonment of 20 years. In addition, it still raises issues regarding the institutions that provide for conversion of capital punishment, pardon matters, length of delay in the execution of capital punishment, and any types of crime punishable by capital punishment. Keywords: policy, criminal code, moderation, capital punishment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document