Search Climate Insights Directory

A group of NGOs argues that the European Commission's proposal to amend the Aarhus Regulation fails to meet international law standards for access to justice. The statement highlights that the current internal review mechanism is ineffective, with most NGO requests rejected as inadmissible. The signatories demand amendments to include 'implementing measures', State aid decisions, and cost protections for NGOs to ensure the delivery of the European Green Deal and compliance with the Aarhus Convention.

ClientEarth employs a legal-centric strategy to enforce environmental laws, challenge corporate pollution, and reshape financial systems. Key achievements include winning the right for the public to challenge the EU in court on environmental decisions, securing the closure of coal plants in Europe, and litigating against fossil fuel companies for misleading advertising and abandoned wells. The organization focuses on four primary pillars: breaking new legal ground for justice, aligning financial flows with planetary needs, transforming food and land use, and phasing out fossil fuels in energy and transport.

The document critiques the European Commission's proposal to update the Aarhus Regulation, asserting it fails to meet international law standards set by the Aarhus Convention. It highlights gaps regarding 'national implementing measures', 'external effects' of acts, and the exclusion of state aid decisions. The authors propose specific legislative amendments to broaden the scope of internal review, remove cost barriers for NGOs, and explicitly link the Regulation to the Aarhus Convention to ensure effective judicial review of EU environmental decisions.

The document argues that the European Commission's proposal to amend the Aarhus Regulation contains loopholes that would leave the EU in breach of the Aarhus Convention. It specifically criticizes the exclusion of acts requiring national implementing measures and state aid decisions from internal review. The paper proposes amendments to broaden the scope of reviewable acts, ensure that costs of litigation are not prohibitive for NGOs, and explicitly link the Regulation to the EU's international obligations under the Aarhus Convention.

The document asserts that the current EU Fisheries Control System fails to deter IUU fishing due to a lack of implementation and harmonisation of sanctions across Member States. It highlights that negligible fines allow offenders to treat sanctions as a "basic cost of doing business" and notes that the penalty point system is "not fit for purpose" because seriousness criteria vary by state. The factsheet supports the European Commission's proposal to introduce mandatory administrative sanctions with minimum fine levels and objective EU-wide criteria for serious infringements. ClientEarth further recommends expanding the list of serious infringements to include turning off AIS transmitters and failing to mitigate the accidental catch of sensitive species.

ClientEarth calls on the European Parliament to veto the Taxonomy Complementary Delegated Act on Climate, arguing that the European Commission failed to conduct a dedicated Impact Assessment or ensure consistency with the European Climate Law. The organization asserts that fossil gas activities do not lack feasible low-carbon alternatives and that the act risks creating legal uncertainty and locking in carbon-intensive assets, thereby conflicting with the Paris Agreement and the EU's 2050 climate-neutrality goal.

The document analyzes 32 youth climate litigation cases (litigants aged 7-30) filed between 1990 and 2022. It finds that while such cases are increasing in frequency—particularly in Europe—the majority result in unfavorable outcomes or remain pending. Most cases argue that states failed to take adequate climate measures, frequently relying on human rights grounds. The author concludes that future success depends on judicial willingness, procedural adherence, and the substantive strength of legal arguments.

The author contends that the 'No' campaign against the Australian Indigenous Voice to Parliament is not a grassroots movement but a strategic operation by the Atlas Network, a global infrastructure of neoliberal think-tanks. The paper links this effort to a long-term pattern of climate disinformation and opposition to environmental policy, suggesting that the Voice is opposed because it could empower Indigenous communities to challenge fossil-fuel projects. The author details the interlocking memberships between the Atlas Network, the Mont Pelerin Society, and Australian political figures, arguing that these networks use 'astroturfing' and disinformation to shift public opinion in favor of corporate interests.

Earthjustice argues that hydraulic fracturing (fracking) poses grave and irreversible risks to human health and the environment, citing extensive evidence from the United States. The organization contends that the Government of Mendoza's Decree No. 248/18 was issued without sufficient technical research or baseline data, violating the precautionary principle. Earthjustice requests the court to nullify the decree and suspend fracking activities until comprehensive scientific studies on air pollution, water contamination, radioactive waste, and induced seismicity are conducted.

A group of over 30 law professors argues that the public trust doctrine (PTD) is an inherent attribute of state sovereignty that obligates Utah to protect the Great Salt Lake. The brief contends that Utah has violated this duty by failing to restrain upper basin water diversions, which have reduced the lake's footprint by half and threatened species extinction. The authors assert that the PTD applies not only to navigable waters but also to non-navigable tributaries and groundwater that sustain the lake, citing legal precedents from other Western states like California, Nevada, and Hawaii.

The FSD Africa Supplier and Grantee Code of Conduct mandates that all partners act with integrity, transparency, and value for money. It implements a two-tier compliance structure: Level 1 for contracts of £500,001 or more, requiring rigorous policies and annual declarations, and Level 2 for smaller contracts, focusing on overarching principles. Key requirements include adherence to environmental and net-zero policies, human rights protections, anti-money laundering laws, and the support of MSMEs within the delivery chain.

Global Witness reports that 196 land and environmental defenders were murdered in 2023, bringing the total since 2012 to 2,106. The report highlights Latin America as the most dangerous region, with Colombia recording the highest number of deaths. It identifies mining as the primary sector linked to these killings and details a global trend of 'judicial harassment' and restrictive anti-protest laws in the UK, US, and EU. The document emphasizes the disproportionate targeting of Indigenous peoples and calls for the implementation of the Escazú Agreement and better corporate due diligence.

The document argues that the EU's proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is a critical opportunity to hold companies accountable for harms in their value chains. Global Witness proposes five key enhancements: establishing a clear duty to prevent human rights and climate harms, mandating safe stakeholder engagement, removing barriers to justice for victims, preventing reliance on third-party verification to rebut liability, and applying the same due diligence requirements to financial institutions.

The document outlines a legal conflict where Canada-based Methanex Corporation sought over $900 million from the United States after California banned MTBE to protect drinking water. It focuses on the IISD's request to the arbitral tribunal for amicus status, oral submission rights, and observer status to represent public interests and sustainable development principles. While Methanex opposed the intervention, the United States and Canada supported it, leading to a January 2001 tribunal ruling that it has the authority to accept written amicus briefs.

The document explores the intersection of environmental law and climate change in Africa, arguing that legal mechanisms are essential for enforcing policy decisions and managing the continent's vulnerability to climate sensitivity. It highlights how existing developmental challenges, such as poverty and institutional weaknesses, aggravate this vulnerability and proposes multi-disciplinary approaches to mitigation and adaptation.

The document assesses how climate variability and anthropogenic factors drive resource scarcity and conflict in Africa, focusing on the African Union's response and specific regional crises in the Lake Chad Basin, Lesotho, the Nile Basin, the Niger Delta, Tanzania, South Africa, Kenya, Botswana, and Uganda.

The community audit of the Sendou coal-fired power plant in Bargny, Senegal, reveals significant violations of environmental and human rights. Key findings include the discharge of hydrocarbon-contaminated wastewater into Lake Khouloup, air pollution from unconfined coal and ash piles, and the expropriation of land previously designated for victims of coastal erosion without just compensation. The report also highlights the disruption of local economic activities, specifically fish processing at Khelcom, and the restriction of access to a sacred baobab tree, violating religious freedoms.

The report examines the interaction between ICCAs and international and national laws, finding that while international instruments and some national policies show progress, systemic gaps and discriminatory implementation continue to threaten these areas. It highlights the critical need for the recognition of customary land rights, self-determination, and integrated socio-ecological legislation to support community-led conservation.

The African Activists for Climate Justice (AACJ) project, implemented by a consortium including Natural Justice, Oxfam, and others, has worked in Senegal from May 2021 to December 2025 to democratize climate debate and promote inter- and intra-generational climate justice. Key achievements include the creation of six influential networks for women, youth, and local officials, the production of 18 community narratives (podcasts, videos, and comics), and the legal empowerment of communities facing extractive industries. The project has facilitated community participation in national policies such as the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) and the National Adaptation Plan, while supporting legal actions and the recognition of Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs) in biodiversity legislation.

The document provides a comprehensive framework for Senegalese communities to understand climate change, assess their vulnerabilities, and take 'climate action' through legal empowerment. It details the specific climate risks facing Senegal, lists international and national legal obligations, and provides a step-by-step toolkit for advocacy, information access, and litigation.