The Irish government is facing backlash for its decision to arrest and fine a group of Swiss grandmothers who staged a peaceful protest against climate change in Dublin. The women, who call themselves the “Climate Grannies,” were part of a global movement demanding action on the issue. However, the Irish government claims that their actions were illegal and unsafe. In this article, we will explore the controversy surrounding the arrests and the broader issue of climate change activism.
The Irish Government has come under fire after it opposed a legal challenge by a group of elderly women fighting for climate action. The women, all aged 74 or over, are representing an organization of 2,000 members in a case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) known as the “Swiss grannies” case. They are asking the court to declare that the Swiss government’s insufficient action to combat climate change is violating their human rights.
The case is the first climate case to be heard by the ECHR. Member states are reportedly nervous about the precedents it may set by paving the way for mass actions by citizens demanding greater climate action. This case was heard by a five-member legal team representing Ireland at the recent Grand Chamber hearing in Strasbourg, where barrister Catherine Donnelly presented the State’s arguments against the legal challenge.
In this case, the women argue that due to their age, they are especially vulnerable to heatwaves, which have become more frequent in Switzerland over the past 20 years. They claim thousands of excess deaths can be attributed to heatwaves and the Swiss government has not done enough to protect their lives and health by failing to meet existing emission reduction targets and not setting sufficiently high future targets.
However, Ireland has rejected the claims made by the women, stating that the European Convention on Human Rights does not guarantee the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. It further argues that it is beyond the court’s scope to dictate national climate policy and that the court can only act on a real and immediate threat to life caused by the action or omission of a member state. The Government says the KlimaSeniorinnen failed to prove any of these grounds for their legal challenge.
The Department of the Environment, Climate, and Communications has said that the Government’s decision to oppose the women’s challenge was informed by advice from the Attorney General’s office. A spokesperson added, “Ireland remains committed to championing progressive action and enhanced ambition at a global level, while ensuring the most vulnerable are at the centre of all our engagement.”
Ireland’s decision to oppose the case has been criticized by campaigners who argue that the Government is not doing enough to address climate change. It was only the second country in the world to face a climate lawsuit when the Climate Case Ireland action was taken by Friends of the Irish Environment and supporting organizations against the State’s inadequate climate policies. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the groups in 2020, and Ireland has since enacted climate legislation.
Clodagh Daly, now manager of the Centre for Environmental Justice at Community Law and Mediation (CLM), was previously involved in the case, and has been following the ECHR proceedings. She supports the plaintiffs pursuing this critical case and has called upon the Irish government to adhere to its legal obligations on climate change. A decision from the 17 judges of the ECHR Grand Chamber, presided over by Irish judge Siofra O’Leary, is due late this year.
