Environmental Constitutionalism with Chinese Characteristics

Through the Constitutional amendments of 2018, the environmental provisions in China’s Constitution have been further developed. Policy endorsement from the Communist Party of China is a key factor that prompted the inclusion of additional environmental provisions in the 2018 constitutional amendments. China’s environmental Constitution adopts the ‘national objective provision’ approach which imposes obligations of environmental care on State institutions and public authorities, such as the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. These are the two most important characteristics of environmental constitutionalism in China. This analysis traces the development of China’s environmental constitution and examines the constitutional significance of the provisions inserted in the Preamble and those expanded upon in the constitutional mandate of the State Council.

Recent Youth-Led and Rights-Based Climate Change Litigation in Canada: Reconciling Justiciability, Charter Claims and Procedural Choices

This analysis examines three recent and ongoing Canadian climate change litigation cases: ENvironnement JEUnesse c Procureur général du Canada, La Rose v Canada and Mathur v Ontario. Consistent with international climate change litigation trends, these cases are youth-led and rights-based and they advance claims for present and future generations. They present apparently conflicting judicial views on the justiciability of climate change claims and on the use of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to advance such claims. We examine these issues. We also analyse the insights the cases offer into the connections between litigants’ procedural choices and early success, either in withstanding a motion to strike, or in obtaining court authorisation to proceed by way of class action.

Climate Disruption in Canadian Constitutional Law: References Re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act

This analysis considers the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, 2021 SCC 11, in which a majority of the Court upheld as constitutional national carbon pricing legislation. The decision presents an excellent illustration of the legally-disruptive nature of climate change. Illustrating that nothing is static in a climate disrupted world—including constitutional law—this article identifies three shifts the Court makes in relation to climate disruption. First, the decision represents a shift away from climate denialism towards a judicial willingness to confront the environmental, social and legal implications of climate change for Canada. Second, the majority embraces and perhaps strengthens a ‘culture of justification’ in climate decision-making. Third—and more tentatively—the majority moves beyond the erasure of Indigenous peoples from Canadian federalism but still yet fails to engage with Indigenous laws and jurisdiction as part of Canada’s constitutional response to climate change.