ECHR makes ‘climate change’ a human right – UK must obey and the Swiss fume

Once again this foreign court invents law for the British and other people, despite Brexit

Montage © Facts4EU.Org 2024

When will we ever stop being governed by unelected foreign judges?

In today’s report Facts4EU.Org summarises the implications of the latest ECHR ruling against Switzerland on Tuesday which could bring massive lawsuits against them and against the UK government.

On Tuesday (09 Apr 2024) the ‘European Court of Human Rights’ once again extended its mandate to create law across Europe – including the United Kingdom. The UK’s exit from the European Union makes no difference.

The ECHR judges (see ‘Observations’ below) ruled on three cases concerning climate change: in one of which it found in favour of the Swiss activist and the other two were only denied because of technicalities.

Dr. Stephan Rietiker, President of Pro Switzerland,
speaking exclusively to Facts4EU.Org and CIBUK.Org

"This verdict is an outrageous and unacceptable breach of the separation of powers and the fundamental democratic rights of the Swiss people.

We are currently exploring options to offset the potential consequences of this ludicrous verdict. Our lawyers are working on an action plan that may turn this verdict into a boomerang against the plaintiffs' intentions."

- Dr. Stephan Rietiker, President of Pro-Schweiz, speaking to our Chairman, 10 Apr 2024

About 'Pro Switzerland'

Headed up by the charismatic doctor and businessman Stephan Rieteker, Pro Switzerland has been formed via the amalgamation of three independence groups who decided to work together. This has created a powerful force in that country for those who believe in independence, democracy, sovereignty and freedom.

Pro Switzerland is ready to fight uncompromisingly for an independent, sovereign, safe, neutral and cosmopolitan Switzerland. Facts4EU.Org and CIBUK.Org have co-operated with them for some time and share many of the same values. They are now consulting lawyers with a view to fighting the ECHR's decision.

Brexit Facts4EU.Org Summary

This verdict was about ‘climate change’ being added to the long list of ‘human rights’

This court has continually expanded its remit

© Brexit Facts4EU.Org 2024 - click to enlarge

Case No.1 - Switzerland

The case Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland concerned a complaint by four women and a Swiss association, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz, whose members are concerned about the consequences of global warming on their living conditions and health.

The Court found that the Swiss Confederation had failed to comply with its duties (“positive obligations”) under the Convention concerning climate change.

Behind the complainants is the environmental organisation Greenpeace, which has financed the course to the ECHR and controlled it in terms of content. The court has made a political judgment which calls into question the democratic order of Switzerland - and indeed the United Kingdom and all other ECHR signatories. This weighs heavily for Switzerland because it guarantees its citizens far-reaching powers which force the authorities to implement the political will of the people and the cantons.

Pro Switzerland notes that :-

"Increasingly foreign courts are directing and 'correcting' Switzerland's democracy. Even if a Swiss judge sits in the judges' body, the judgments of the ECtHR are anti-democratic and arbitrary acts.

The complainants have effectively taken away the traditional Swiss political participation within the framework of direct democracy (referenda) and delegated it to foreign judges.

"The term climate change is neither a fact that is occupied by scientific facts nor with comprehensible arguments. The political judgment of the ECtHR is a one-sided, sovereignty-defying action with the aim of helping an ideology with dictatorial traits to achieve a breakthrough."

Case No.2

The case Carême v. France concerned a complaint by a former inhabitant and mayor of the municipality of Grande-Synthe, who submits that France has taken insufficient steps to prevent global warming and that this failure entails a violation of the right to life and the right to respect for private and family life.

The Court only ruled against on a technicatiy, viz. that the applicant ”did not have victim status within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention.”

Case No.3

The case Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and 32 Others concerned the current and future severe effects of climate change, which the applicants attribute to the respondent States, and which they claim impact their lives, well-being, mental health and the peaceful enjoyment of their homes.

The Court only ruled against because the complainants had not exhausted all legal routes in Portugal before presenting their case to the ECHR.

Almost unbelievable assumption of power by these foreign judges

The first verdict about climate change in favour of the claimant will now have effect in all 46 member countries of the ECHR. This now opens the door to thousands of claims against the UK government.

Facts4EU.Org consulted the ECHR’s website and here is what it says :-

“Even though the European Convention on Human Rights does not enshrine any right to a healthy environment as such, the European Court of Human Rights has been called upon to develop its case-law in environmental matters on account of the fact that the exercise of certain Convention rights may be undermined by the existence of harm to the environment and exposure to environmental risks.”

- ECHR, 09 Apr 2024

In other words, the Court admits there is nothing in the Convention about climate change but it has taken it upon itself to make case-law about it, which will then be considered to be binding by the UK’s courts.

To be clear, this has not come about through any Act of Parliament where the British people’s duly elected representatives may vote. This is law made in Strasbourg, by foreign judges, about which the UK and its people have no say whatsoever.

The EU insists the UK must stay under the ECHR, but won’t sign up to it itself

In what must surely be one of the most blatant acts of EU hypocrisy, the EU insisted as part of the UK-EU ‘Trade and Cooperation Agreement’ that the UK remained signed up to the ECHR.

And yet the EU will not sign up itself. Finally in 2013 it reached an agreement to join, but was then blocked by its own court: the Court of Justice of the EU (ECJ). Ten years later the EU is STILL not a member of the ECHR.

Here is what the EU Commission has to say about the EU’s current position:-

“At present, all 46 Council of Europe member states, including the 27 EU Member States, are already parties to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the EU itself is not. This means that actions of the EU’s institutions, agencies and other bodies cannot currently be challenged at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

- European External Action Service (EU Commission), 18 Oct 2021


If the public needed any more justification for leaving the ECHR, surely this latest judgement by its court has provided it. None of the judges on the European Court have any specialist knowledge of climate change. What little they know will have been provided by climate change lobbyists.

The Convention itself has nothing to say about climate change, but as with so many other issues the Court has taken it upon itself to pass judgement on it.

When will the UK Government say “enough is enough” and lead the way in leaving this undemocratic and dictatorial body which has transformed itself beyond all recognition since it was founded? This is a political court. It should be called out as such.

Prime Minister, make the announcement that the UK will leave the ECHR now. No more procrastination, just act.

While we wait - no doubt in vain - for this to happen, Brexit Facts4EU.Org and CIBUK.Org will continue to work with our colleagues in Switzerland and in other European countries to turn back the tide of creeping oligarchy engulfing the UK and the continent.

Facts4EU.Org badly needs you today

We are a 'not for profit' team (we make a loss) and any payment goes towards the actual work, not plush London offices, lunch or taxi expenses, or other luxuries of some organisations.

We badly need more of our thousands of readers to become members, to support this work. Could this be you, today? It's quick and easy, we give you a choice of two highly secure payment providers, and we do NOT ask you for further support if you pay once. We just hope you keep supporting us. Your membership stays anonymous unless you tell us otherwise.

Please don't assume that other people will keep us going - we don't receive enough to survive and we need your help today. Could you help us? We rely 100% on public contributions from readers like you.

If you believe in a fully-free, independent, and sovereign United Kingdom, please join now by clicking on one of the links below or you can use our Support page here. You will receive a personal, friendly ‘thank you’ from a member of our team within 48 hours. Thank you.

[ Sources: ECHR ] Politicians and journalists can contact us for details, as ever.

Brexit Facts4EU.Org, Thurs 11 Apr 2024

Click here to go to our news headlines

Please scroll down to COMMENT on the above article.
And don't forget actually to post your message after you have previewed it!

Share this article on

Something to say about this? Scroll down for reader comments

Since before the EU Referendum, Brexit Facts4EU.Org
has been the most prolific researcher and publisher of Brexit facts in the world.

Supported by MPs, MEPs, & other groups, our work has impact.

We think facts matter. Please donate today, so that we can continue to ensure a clean Brexit is finally delivered.

Any credit card user

Quick One-off


From £5 - £1,000



From £3 per month

Paypal Users Only - Choose amount first

Quick One-off