G8 could face class suits on climate change

CEBU, Philippines - The world’s richest nations could face class actions on behalf of the people in developing countries if they fall short of substantial steps to reduce their “historic emissions,” which are blamed for triggering climate change impacts.

Cebuano environmental lawyer Antonio Oposa said yesterday in a statement sent to The FREEMAN after the Asian Peoples’ Climate Court in Bangkok, Thailand found G8 countries guilty of “planetary malpractice” on the basis of existing international legal standards and conventions.

“The Asian People’s Climate Court is an experiment to show that there is a legal basis for developing countries to sue industrialized nations and demand reparation for damages resulting from climate change,” said Oposa, a Ramon Magsaysay 2009 awardee, who stood as chief prosecutor of the two-hour mock trial organized by Tcktcktck campaign and civil society groups throughout the region, including the Philippines-initiated lawyers’ network Global Legal Action on Climate Change.

After hearing the case filed on behalf of children from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Nepal, Thailand and the Philippines, the tribunal presided by Judge Amara Pongsapich, chair of the Thai Human Rights Commission, ruled that G8 countries, as the major greenhouse gas emitters, have to set up a global adaptation fund with sufficient finance for poor nations to cope with climate change.

“Defendants have threatened and continue to threaten petitioners’ right to life and the sources of life, thus committing planetary malpractice resulting in inter-generational damages,” Pongsapich said.

“They have broken about a dozen international agreements, for example by breaching their duty not to cause harm or their obligations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.”

Other highlights outlined in the verdict include an invitation to the UN Human Rights Commission to appoint a special rapporteur on the human rights dimension of Climate Change to explore links between climate change-related harm and acts or omissions of specific states, and the legal obligations or liabilities; and to initiate the process of setting up an international tribunal on Environmental Crimes. The court, nevertheless, concluded, that “the duty to protect human rights is the obligation of every state.”

With the ruling, Oposa urged the G8 countries to agree to a fair, ambitious and binding climate treaty to help developing countries, which are more climate sensitive and yet have lesser capacity to adapt, at the Copenhagen Summit this December.

“While our mock-trial has shown that the legal grounds exist, we would prefer to see rapid G8 action to reduce emissions and fund adaptation in vulnerable countries, rather than a string of future climate trials about compensation for damage that can still be avoided if we act today.”

The ruling against the G8 plaintiffs came after prosecution and defense interviewed 10 “witnesses,” among them two climate scientists and “affected citizens” such as Thai and Bangladeshi farmers, a Nepalese sherpa, a Filipino farmer and an Indonesian women’s advocate.

In his account, farmer Joselito Tambalo related how strange weather patterns, like earlier-than-expected rains, ruined crops this year as well as working hours, and how his province of Nueva Ecija got hit by a tornado for the first time also this year, destroying more farm properties.

Another witness from Nepal said that ice in the Himalayas was melting at a much faster rate than 30 years ago, causing flash floods and severe drought.

With their lives and livelihoods depending on effective action to tackle climate change as well as measures to adapt to unavoidable impacts, their testimonies had given the court a “clear sense” that emissions from industrialized countries over the past 200 years clearly show the culpability of G8 countries for global warming and hardships inflicted on Asia.

In recent years, Asian nations have repeatedly witnessed the devastation wrought by floods and stronger and more recurrent typhoons, among other natural disasters.

The Philippines, for one, is still reeling from the billions of damage caused by Ondoy, which despite its relatively mild velocity brought torrential rains.

Climate change experts have said that extreme weather disturbances such as Ondoy, which is said to be the third extreme weather disturbance to hit the country in recent years following typhoons Milenyo in 2006 and Frank in 2008, will become more frequent due to climate change.

Oxfam climate change spokesperson Clement Kalonga said, “The storms and floods across Asia these days remind us of the huge threats people in this region are facing already.

Climate change will make things only worse, and as judges at the Asian People’s Climate Court found that the G8 are responsible for the problem, we urge them to live up their responsibilities at the UN climate talks in Bangkok and put sufficient finance for adaptation in developing countries on the table.”

The mock climate court hearing coincided with the ongoing United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change at Bangkok, which is dubbed as the penultimate stage in a series of meetings designed to draw up an ambitious and effective international response to climate change, to be agreed at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 15) in Copenhagen this December. — /MEEV (THE FREEMAN)