By Sam Tobin
LONDON (Reuters) – Britain failed to set proper objectives in its climate adaptation strategy, environmental campaigners argued on Tuesday in a case which relies on a landmark recent ruling by Europe’s top human rights court.
Friends of the Earth is taking legal action over Britain’s national adaptation programme, which was published last year and sets out what the government and others will do to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
The programme is designed to protect citizens from the risks posed by high temperatures, coastal flooding and extreme weather.
Friends of the Earth’s lawyer David Wolfe argued in court filings that ministers had to set outcomes to address specific risks, rather than “a generic aim simply to reduce risks”.
The government’s lawyer Mark Westmoreland Smith said the environmental group’s arguments misunderstood what ministers must do and are essentially a challenge to how the government approached its duties under climate change legislation.
“The nature, ambition and framing of the objectives within the programme are matters for the judgment of the (minister), who is politically accountable for them,” he said in court documents.
Friends of the Earth’s case relies in part on the European Court of Human Rights’ April ruling that Switzerland violated its citizens’ human rights by failing to do enough to combat climate change.
But Westmoreland Smith argued the Swiss case concerned measures to mitigate the effects of climate change through a regulatory framework and was of limited relevance.
Climate campaigners have increasingly turned to the law to force governments to move more quickly on tackling emissions.
Friends of the Earth was one of three groups which successfully challenged Britain’s latest climate action plan earlier this year.
(Reporting by Sam Tobin; Editing by Christina Fincher)
