Benue State University, Makurdi

Examining States Judicial Response to Issues of Climate Change

Sunday John Apochi*

Abstract

Climate change has become a threat without borders with grave unprecedented consequences. The Supreme Court of Netherlands in the case of Urgenda construed the states positive human rights obligations as requiring a 25percent reduction of its greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 compared with 1990 levels. This article examines how judicial precedent can decide the level of state effort required to mitigate climate change. The paper finds that judges have predominantly approached this issue by seeking to identify an elusive benchmark, either by deduction from global objectives or induction from state conduct. This article establishes that the judicial assessment of a state’s requisite efforts inevitably relies on equity infra legem. Acknowledging this, judges could learn from the international courts experience with establishing clarity in the midst of vague legal rules.

DOWNLOAD COMPLETE ARTICLE HERE (CLICK)