norma, spite, it might not be the most important story about china of today. but that's what the big piece attention to. how is citizen jim listened? we played in the story, the listening post, i fixed the media. we don't cover the news, we cover the way the news is covered. the court force governments act on climate change. a group of young activists assuming thousands of governments in europe and beyond. they argue these governments failed to protect their rights to a healthy environment. so to this case, lead to concerted action on global warming. this is inside the hello and welcome to the program. i'm how much enjoying a historic climate case has begun at the european court of human rights and

strasbourg. young activists are taking on powerful governments over there alleged in action against climate change. the court's rulings are legally binding on member countries. the legal route seems to be increasingly favored by active is to hold leaders to account. and young people are increasingly at the forefront of climate change. activism could an approach based on child's rights, be the wife way forward and tackling global warming. we have lots of discuss, but 1st like assumption we've set it up for us. it's 6 you versus 32 countries. they argue, governments are not doing enough to start until reforming. and the inaction both is listed they have and like the youth age between 11 and 24, made their way to the your pin code of human rights to argue the case with the support of all the time. in fact, we are not to 6, we are the 6 represented asian ration. we are the voices of the user, so that one's to leave alive with this promise. and this is good for everyone else

. and this, they come from areas in portugal ravaged by was fires and he played the fall of the case 3 years after the cds of forest fires in 2017 killed 66 people. they say the a suffering from inside the over the health and natural disasters. it affects their physical and mental health, their civil, political, and social rights, as well as their dignity. it is therefore crucial to adopt a child rights based approach to the question of climate change and how it affects their human rights. 27, e u. member states, as well as the you case with them in no way russia active key of being sued, making it the law, just have a climate case to be heard by a quote in stress, but more than 18 lawyers represent the states brush as not represented. they say governments understand the threat of climate change from the case outside the

courtroom. they say all the right things about departments emergency. but today, they are denying the reality that that's what we are experiencing is getting worse and worse to the extreme pizza. i am limited in how i exercise and how much time i can spend outdoors. i am forced to stay inside and i struggle to sleep. some night because of the heat and things to that weak crime is policies that the countries are taking bets. i remain hopeful that the courts will understand the urgency of the situation. and we are side in favor of our case. last month, a judge in the us state of montana handed a historic victory to young. that was the case involving time to change on here. and yet of the, your pin code of human rights has to move pending a decision in this case is not expected for several months. but with increasing

while fires in the face becoming more frequent climate law states brought on by youth, could become a trend in geography and beyond. mickelson chevy, full inside story, the. all right, let's go ahead and bring in our guess. joining us in paris, catherine camper. she's head of climate change out a patient program at the organization for economic cooperation and development and in london. as far as how fun he's the director of climate just as an ox, pam us a warm welcome to you both and thanks so much for joining us. today on inside story aspect, let me start with you today. this is a landmark case. it's the largest ever climate, the case to be heard by the european court of human rights from your vantage point . how significant is it's, it's, it is very significant. it's the 1st case before the european court of human rights

on climate change. and it is the 1st one sofa only that's targets. 32 different countries that are members of the counselor here, that's up the court. so it raises a whole number of the interesting and broad leading questions and also because it's against so many countries. if the court rules for the plaintiffs, we could have a pretty significant impact on the world as a whole. and you mentioned that this raises some pretty interesting legal points going forward. what are some of those, do you consider to be the more interesting legal arguments being made in this case? for sure that the most, the most challenging one legally is that the, the, the, the people, the, the, the children who brought the come over there which are on the, brought the conflict or are, are making claims against $32.00 different countries for their separate actions that having an impact on them, normally the court, when it ruled,

normally the rules on impacts on the state has on people within its direct control. and so the issue of climate change shows how to properly respect human rights. but you know, the courts cannot simply hold that right. stop at borders because emissions don't stop at motors impacts happen externally as well. catherine, i saw you like, let's go, go ahead. i'm sorry, the surgical court rules correctly. it will hold all these countries liable because all of them are causing the impact that is affecting the plaintiffs. catherine, i saw you reacting a lot to what the osh clock was saying there, and it looked like you wanted to jump in, so please go ahead. no, i think what he's trying to see the, the, it's on cost, it's across the border issue. but so the impacts of climate change also include this is how much i gathered from the news thus far is that they very much

constructing the case on the basis of the impact that there's anything in their little country such as good to go as they were describing the health impacts of what fires and extreme heat and they've been suffering over the last 2 years. in katherine, let me also ask you about the fact that this summer was the hottest on record. this case is arguing the young people, in particular, a face, a future of hardship because countries are simply not doing enough to combat climate change up from your vantage point. or the countries that are named in this lawsuit based on what you've seen, actually preparing to face the effects of climate change very slowly. so, so each time i hope to take some extreme event to get a nice, a bit of progress in terms of legislation in terms of extra investments of adopting some kind of change. it's nowhere near as much as we would have to do in order to keep the level of of, of life and the 11th of suffering that we're having today to keep that constant in

the future. there's a large amount of investment that is needed. and what climate the research was and experts argue all the time that it's a fraction of the cost and it needs to actually adapt to climate change now. and so it's easy, so to speak, to, to protect our lives, at least in the next, the few decades, not in the long run in the long run, i think without medication for a going any way, but at least in the short run, it will cost a lot less trixie, and as opposed to each time lasting, these extreme events happen and we are not seeing the these are making sufficient progress even in the face of the images that we're seeing or across the world. i think they do some of our truck um, one of the core arguments in this case is that um is this is causing a lot of anxiety and distress for young people. they're not just talking about the physical health here when it comes to climate change. the impact it's having on health, they're also talking about mental health. how does that differentiate this case

from other cases in the past? i mean, there's a long history of looking at a pool in human and degrading treatment as a punishment. not only the mental aspects, not only excuse me, not only the physical ask us to alter the mental aspect. so in that sense they are subject applying that same logic to climate change that has been applied in human rights cases previously addressed by the court. so it's, it's, it's quite logical for them to, to, to, to apply. but yeah, but i mean, the impact. so, i mean, i just, i just around this and one thing really, i mean, before, of course, this is the case about the impacts of portugal. meaning the case of success, or if it will have impacts on places where the impacts of a so much worse. i mean, we saw the drought in east africa, which was, you know, 99 percent toys and a 100 percent caused by climate change. and a, and i mean the, the, it's

a staggering the, the amount of impacts on people's lives, health, survival aspect. and you mentioned that the youth who brought this case a, you know, they come from areas in portugal. they've been ravaged by wildfires. and, and he waves um, they filed this case 3 years after a series of forest fires in 2017 killed dozens of people. they say they are suffering from severe anxiety because of all this. they say that they are representing an entire generation. this really puts into stark relief, how existential, this issue is for them. and i want to ask you, if you think that this is the kind of case that has the potential to connect with the public more because of that. i think, you know, i think that that is actually one of the reasons why this. but the people brought this case, you know, did so if it really brings out that element to off on, on the lack of fantasy woods, the younger generations,

the lack of into generational justice, the people making these decisions are really not the people who are mostly going to be affected by it it's, it's the, the younger generations in the future. generations, because we, we are, we're headed towards a world of sweet degrees warming by, by 2100 and some of the plaintiffs who brought this with youngest ones. we would still be alive and would face that to, you know, most smell it to taste it. catherine. we know that the occurrence that extreme wildfires is growing with unprecedented damages. and so many countries around the world and, and this case is, is highlighting that to a certain degree, i want to talk to you about some of the research that you've done when it comes to the growing occurrences of wild fires. how that is impacting communities, how much damage is being caused as a result? yes, thanks for that question. it's uh it's in fact what part is an issue that we also

have across all the front of biome, say in the world to you've had white finance. indeed alicia, that's a, in the, in direct consequences. so the longer term consequences of respiratory diseases killed a 100 thousands of people that estimated 800000 people and wine oriented the country . so in virtual countries, you may not hear so much about about light is not in proportion terms, you see see some, some of the, some victims that actually use them. but nevertheless, i think the impacts in terms of health are virtually the same wi fi as in canada piece here, for example, called on the northern america in the us. thanks for being on of new york city under another of uh, of uh, air quality. and then we would only see the results exposed of, of how many, how much respiratory distress we suffered and how much or excess of fatality rates we can observe that very soon. but the consequences danger come down, try know the judge. i know most the know the very direct impacts those offered by

the community or for very obvious reasons in terms of their own personal assets. but also in terms of the sources of a kind of hard to think about timber. but then the tree close to the entire economy as we've seen in in portable world. so in canada, right, where you see the percentage drops and g, b outputs in the use varies extreme events happen. for example, the bush fires on the 2018 cam tires in california. they produce the damages that we estimate and around 20 beating in us dollars, which is completely unheard of. for a good x dream events of buying cars. we've seen these numbers return before when we talk about extreme flat events, a similar to what we've seen recently, but never provide cars and i think st. thank you. hear your e. i'm kind of related extremely by knowing that the slower also wants to drop the cost of trimming, no economic damage, and obviously hardship as it just turns, especially in the cabin. if we could just take another step back for

a moment. i'm curious to know your thoughts on if you believe that countries, if their policies and if their practices are actually evolving in the face of this increased risk from wild fires. i mean, are we seeing countries actually scale up? because often times when these disasters occur, it looks as though countries are being more reactive and had not really been proactive in trying to combat this in a different way. oh absolutely, and the dynamics are unfortunately still the same old i've been working on these topics now for the better half the last 2 decades. and unfortunately, the dynamics of students they. so if you look at spending your take, just think again, one example big 5 cars and because the spending expend public expenditure for white card suppression in the last 40 years, if you look at the united states, for example, going to go you see that spending has increased like tween default for suppressing white card which card is perfectly fine with the size of wi fi and the frequency

that we're seeing. but if you didn't know, paying to actual spending on preventing those 5 hers and by all means we know how to prevent disasters, we know how to adapt to them in a better way. the slow on said ones as well as the sudden on say, once we know what we can do, we can manage our forest better. we can plan our urban environments, but just ways to reduce the why the urban interface. just to give you an example. we know a lot of what we can do to reduce the urban heat. i ended 6, which as you know, is dramatic, especially in your being countries as well. and yet we don't do any of that. we always wait until a next stream event happens and this is where we didn't put the money where this is, appreciate you spend no, not the total. or we can even show the benefits of, of the cost benefit ratio. such measures introducing the early thing compared to what would happen to expose it again. so what we're changing is it's a very subtraction, but we'll come from dog. we've got to know if you're pointed to that already

putting the crime and targets that we're discussing here on the gay sion more and more introducing out of taishan more strange and that of taisha target as well. that's that i would interpret as a step in the right direction, but it's very, very silver's aspect i, i want to ask you your thoughts on some of the key arguments on both sides of this case. first, i want to ask you about an argument from the plaintive slide. one of the key accusations from the plaintiff is that the fundamental human rights of people are being infringed upon. because the countries in question have failed to adequately reduce human caused warming. how strong of a legal argument is that from your perspective a legit so it's, it's a strong argument because they can show a direct line between the stand goes off these governments to reduce emissions and the impacts on their lives. because the lives of, of, of many others that's the climate science is a, is,

it has become so clear that that's it. you just cannot be questioned. i think the challenge of and when you're coming to the government side would be, well, you know, we should us, it's for governments to decide the types of policies that you need adopted to, to, to address that. so the thing is though, i mean the governments are not, do you mean they can be there's a whole range of measures that different policy measures that could be taking joint due submissions. a there's no, it's, there's not necessarily one or one of the single, a way to get there different ways to get there. but they're not getting to the results. we are. we are headed to a world of temperature, a woman of about $2.00 degrees. the governments have said that they have target is, is 1.5, and that by the way is not is actually not a target setting. you based on human rights standards. we are seeing vast

violations of people's human rights food, housing, shelter on the current warming, which is about $1.00 degrees. so, you know, one, the governments i, i'm not setting the right target this setting $1.00 to $2.00, which is itself insufficient. and they're not even needing that. they the, their own classrooms. if you read them, show that they are insufficient. so yeah, they're not, they're not meeting those targets and really guns shooting at should be all that's in their power at the start of the health. other than all that, that's and if i were to prevent the harm to human rights and look at any, any government's actions, they don't do the dental mobilizing the to millions that on the billions that are needed to shift as to renewable energy, they're not insulating homes. they're not switching from gas to keep them so you know, they're not, you know, they don't putting taxes on private jet, private jets as surveys. the whole whole range of things. i mean it's, it's, it's really, um, their policies are almost visa,

magical reality that somehow will encourage you. renewable energy we will put in some, uh, inadequate to call them pricing and an upsets. and that will result the problem. i mean, it just won't, in any serious scientist, any serious policy make little told what women would show measures are insufficient and, and, and i know really off measures actually let me get back to you in just a minute with regards to the arguments that are being made by european government lawyers, but 1st let me go to catherine because i did see catherine reacting to some of what you were saying. it looked to me like you wanted to add to the point that aspect was making. so please go ahead. a bad just to add that to it. yes, it's true. read the strange and you have measures that are currently taken cold, perhaps to be quite a bit stronger. and i think it's, you know, cuz it's sort of a multilateralism in that space. he's also taking a huge because they are such hard for negotiations and countries are better and

very heterogeneous in their positions. but we are making progress. i mean, especially in the developed countries and patients has been going down. and i think what we're also trying to tell countries as we supposed are in the course of making progress, is that we need to tell the stories on the opportunities to 9 behind engaging in the fire department change and. and as much as i work on the patient as much as my view to use to, to both the impacts to the for, and find the measures of how we can adopt and protect our community. strong, easy, but i think it's all simple, that'd be fine. politics, preventive stories and we've been hearing a lot about the this year that actually contributed to reaching some of the, what we call top climate to be points. and you would see that as our quality just send 1.5 is actually not enough to to avoid that as triggering these climate tipping points. and why we can only tell the exposed in any given year whether this will experience have been points lost. a lot of what we seen in terms of impact is

pointing that it was actually the tipping point here. and then we see that it's literally just a high degree holding these tipping points will be triggering a lot more in the future. but we're trying to to, to tell countries, or what we're trying to get. their thinking has owned is really to say, what are the positive tipping points in society? how can we turn the tie in in favor of transformative action the policy made? and i think this is quite an important story. the opportunity is lying in the way that we manage these transitions going forward. as far, let me get back to you now about the arguments in this particular case, european government lawyers say that they accept the impact of climate change. but these cases should be heard in national courts 1st uh their argument is one based on jurisdiction. what do you say to that the the, the, the issue with that is that the challenge is, is, is not,

is not national. i mean, in the international court. so it'll be easier to, to hold the government to account for the impacts on the people within, within that territory. but, so for example, you know, gemini has had a litigation in, in the course about the impacts on jim and young people. but the court said that we're not looking at the impact on people outside. and so it will be deeply problematic if jim and publish the friends of decisions. i mean, to hear the base of the impacts on, on jims because the impacts vary between countries on the impacts are worse uh, in, in, in, in, in, in, in countries that are, you know, a more vulnerable to the impacts of, of climate change. so, you know, that's, you know, that would be problematic to, to, to deal with these things naturally relative to recognize them for the trans

boundary of situations that they actually are. catherine of last month, a judge in the us state of montana handed, a historic victory to young activists and a case involving climate change in europe at the european court of human rights. there are 2 more climate cases that are now pending. um the fact that there are these 2 other cases pending at the european court of human rights and the fact that there was this victory in montana. do you think that we're going to see more of these types of lawsuits being brought going forward? it certainly shows that climate change, these alter raising people's lives directly or indirectly in the form of climate anxieties or so in, in the form of expects that the future opportunities as well. i think this is what they're clearly showing. but we've seen these integrations as well. on the other patient side, we seem to engage those up against local authorities,

no responsible actors, such as may years. they failed to protect people against heavy storks, against law. and by the leasing fees, mitigations, i think it's an attempt in an environment where a lot of the policy stuff we're working on, not necessarily mandatory, not necessary policies. the federal government, central government can mandates that so they can only uh, provide guidelines in the, in a lot of authority is done at other levels of government and in a very different, a change to sort of hold everyone to account and hold this responsible for their degree, we see these, these litigation, so i think that they're involved and so symbolic this think i should not be underestimated that. i think it's a hor, climate change impact. nice off communities around the world. mean see such we can go through the process. the process is happening as far rulings by the european court of human rights are legally binding 4 member states. um,

but do you see complications going forward as far as implementation? if the play that for to be successful in this case, and if that ruling were to be legally binding, how easy would it be to implement? well loving it to the level of invitation of their judgments varies. um, i'd say that most of the countries in question would implement the decision that they may take the time about it. they do generally they and they have the history is where, where a ruling is very, very clear. um it likes payments of compensation for example. that's normally just done, but where it requires a strong loan program at a change sometimes that does that, that that does take a while and, and got some government reg, the fee to the so for example, check the check the public and it's the decisions that have been imposed on it on

a non discrimination against roman communities. lots of subtracting there. there are mechanisms by which ministers of the council, if you can hold states to account for implementation. of course, when there's a key judgment, it makes it much easier for the governments to be held accountable by civil society . catherine, let me ask you and please just be a be and be mindful of the fact we have about a minute and a half left. um, do you think that if this case is successful going forward um that a specific mechanism would need to be created to be put in place in order to ensure that enforcement was actually effective? or i think inforcement just in general, the kind of policy step for working on which is helpful because we see that the where, where you cannot hold any one's for accounts. progress has been very, very snow and you've been just so whatever it means, tremendous help us getting there and making sure that the targets that were sent to

we know what targets we need to reach in order to keep, to avoid 5, a degree roaming scenario. we don't want measures to take on the mitigation side and on the other patient side. so what often has to be the last thing is that we actually as long as these policy is involved, the every one of us that is responsive, a society. and by what means is doctors governments to account and what we're doing would be helpful. so anything that can help us to get to where we need to go, i think it's very welcome. all right, well we have run out of time, so we're going to have to leave the conversation. no, thanks so much so much to our guest catherine camper and as far as how fun and thank you to for watching, you can see the program again any time by visiting our website. i'll just share a dot com and for further discussion, go to our facebook page. that's facebook dot com, forward slash age and side story. you can also during the conversation on x r handle is at ha, inside story for me. i mentioned to him and a whole team here, bye for now the,

the the v e. usually just somebody just said to take place in canada as the block looks to make itself more resilient. we'll assume it to help with the dis, unites on the many challenges they face on the altro nations remarks connected with one of the world's worst humanitarian crisis. we don't accept any getting migrant joining with the military to impose that deadly political agend. we have to filter our nation,

what is happening to the retention? that's one of the biggest stains of the country as well as in not really. this is important to me in an unholy alliance or analogies here in 5432 mar, upfront takes on the big issues. this isn't a one off you. something about a systemic issue here. black lives don't really matter in the police for unflinching questions is war with were wanting to imminent rigorous debate. people are dying because of lack of medical treatment, challenging conventional was the fact that people are starting to get angry about this is in itself a sign of progress. join me more for me on hills upfront one out 0. know what's happening, you know, have to get some places that others tend on fear. guy buys and put a youth on purpose.

the way that you tell the story is what can make a difference the the other that are on the clock. this is the news on life and go, ha, coming up in the next 60 minutes, thousands of families continued to flee to go into the car back because as by john's need, a fully announced as an in to the self declared or public grief. and i in the interact cuz the victims of the wedding in front of a late arrest far as he's arrest 14 people accuse of next.