john dark searches for the truth again. this time the exiled turkish journalist meets svetlana tihano, sky, exiled leader of the opposition in bella. roost. i mean, of course i'm tied in tattoos of coming untied morally. it's too much on my shoulders, but i have to hold this way because i'm responsible for the future fall country for the people far behind the boss gardens of truth starts february 18th on d w. ah, ah, this is the dublin years aisha coming up to date residents of an indonesian island to take on a swiss corporate giants. rising sea levels caused by climate change or threatening party island. an island does have taken one of the world's biggest cement, make us report to demand accountability. ah,

i'm british manager, welcome to the w. news. asia. residents of a tiny indonesian island are suing as switzerland based cement maker for its role in exacerbating climate change. the plaintiffs alleged the global emissions caused by wholesome, have contributed to sea level rise on their home party island, and they want the swiss farm to pay up and agree to cut the emissions. these roots hold the future for perry island. us money earned her friends are planting mangroves. once mature the trees will serve as a natural barrier to sea water erosion and reduce the risk of flux on the $42.00 hector island, which was just off the coast of jakarta. yeah, i don't wait until we sink safe, perry island. that is their message,

and it's a message they have now go to court as many as one for residence. if perry island, who filed a lawsuit against cement, giant, wholesome, in switzerland, over its contribution to climate change, harassing at the monument illicit that it was ada. ah wholesome, is one of the world's biggest contributor cecia to the emissions causing climate change that impacts our island. i mean, they start to have declined, the seasons are unpredictable to last. it at the sea level is rising. he and his men must hold haul sim, responsible for these consequences of climate change. but of any kind of in this field where the women of the village or planting vegetables is one of the few left that has not been flooded by sea water in recent years. now they will let wherever you go on the island, the struggle against the encroaching sea is obvious. many houses are flooded at high tide, but i re put gentle one of the plaintiffs is determined to stay or the li,

okay. scott, since the constant flooding begun in 2019, it's been difficult to get clean water. we used to rely on this fresh water well, but now it's even unusable for dishwashing. my owners look at them with a lot about the local environmental advocacy group. while he which backs the islanders alongside of swiss and german and g o is optimistic regarding the lawsuit . a similar environmental case against shell in the netherlands has recently been one. but they are preparing for a legal battle that could rack on for years. now, kind of them get, the whole shim won't go bankrupt, we only demand 3 things, mitigation adaptation and loss damage. and this means that we want to provide corrections to the existing production mode, not to bankrupt it before islanders are suing for $14000.00 euros in last damages to be shared amongst them a comparatively small amount. but for fishermen, most of fear in it would make

a huge difference. saw the self sued as must be america. but the ones that they should be led by their conscience and take responsibility for what they've done. they reap so much in profit that they are blinded by the land. they don't see that we are bearing the brunt of a climate emergency. why don't you put them on a rapid reduction in the companies carbon emissions which the lawsuit demands could make a difference in the long run. the plaintiffs also demanding better slot defenses and more mangrove restoration. the fight against the sea and global injustice on perry has just begun and be reached out to wholesome. got a response to our report. this is what the company said. and i caught climate protection has the highest priority for wholesome, and is at the center of our strategy. with this objective, we are pursuing

a strict science based approach with their industries. first validated net cedar goals, which conform with the 1.5 degrees celsius path. we do not believe that court cases focusing on individual companies are an effective mechanism for some mounting. the global complexity of climate change gentlemen are from zurich is nina bery. she's a lawyer for the aid organization swiss church aid, hex, which is supporting the party ireland as in their lawsuit against holds him nina. wholesome does not have operations on potty island. how's have been responsible for climate change impact on it? yes, exactly. does not have applications in on very island, and it stopped also, it's operation in indonesia a few years ago. how i did it, not for the, the global problem off climate change. and also for the legal case, this is not required because emissions can be caused in land, argentine or india,

and they all cause a process into monsieur that causes global warming and then lives. right. so the impact fell on perry, i and regardless of where the emissions are, could use and hosting produces emissions have to big game in a lot of countries globally. but he has nothing in anesha. you're talking about a big scale based on the study that hex, the group that you are a lawyer for, based on the study that hex commissioned. it claims that whole to me responsible for point 42 percent of global fossil fuel and cement emissions. does that make it 100 percent responsible for the climate change impact on party island? no, it doesn't make it a 100 percent responsible because as you just mentioned, it's 1.542 percent. nearly half a percentage of all global industrial emissions since the beginning of industrialization that hosting cost. but there are a lot of other polluters and

a lot of other contributing to global climate change. and then as he level rise, but then i'd have to paint if they also only ask for 0.42 percent of the damages. so they only ask for to share that can be attributed to him. because otherwise it wouldn't be fair. if the i didn't really want to damage for the damage to that, if they want, i'm sort of compensation for the damage that they're facing or the result of climate change. wanted make more sense to go off the industries that are some of the worst polluters and the was polluters, the fossil fuel industries. and some of the top companies in that regard are china goal for example. so the goal gas from this is based on the carbon disclosure project report would not make more sense to target those companies. as you mentioned, go global corporations responsible for a high share of global emissions. but one thing is,

one of the 50 companies that contributed most to climate change. and it's also part of the cement industry of world biggest producer demand. and his industry is responsible every year for up to 8 percent of all the local emissions. this is much more time since the asian industry and the fall time fuel and the energy companies . they have already been in the spotlight and they have already faith, a number of that also globally. but the cement industry is kind of that can be in line, and there should also be the spotlight on them. and that's why a plaintiff chose and holds him for the also and also holds him. it has caused a lot of emissions in their 1st scope. that means they really are caught in their production. so they have direct direct control about these emissions and also about reducing them. damages caused by a complex interplay of factors. and there's very many actors that you yourself admitted why target just one company?

well, theoretically the plaintiffs could target and other companies are a number of companies. but there is, as i said, you choose, did the company that has the biggest impact on one of the biggest impact because they're one of the biggest polluters. but on the other hand, there is also legal restrictions to who you consume, where you consume, if you can, for instance, and file a mass, a claim, or just individuals can, can file a lawsuit. so there are also legal restrictions on where such cases can be brought because it's the trans national case. and then of course, it's also in the end a strategic decision. and hosting, for instance, says that it's out the leader in the industry and it presents itself is very green and time frame b. and it is just not true. and that's right. and they are the target of this loss . or you also, you know, very questioning the principle of a loss and damage the principle that was agreed and the cop 27 in egypt last year.

and the principal, the believe was about group responsibility amongst developing again, amongst developed countries and them getting together and be into a fun for the developing nations. are you against that principle? is that principle? not working? know the principle of damage is very, very important. and as you just mentioned, it was a big topic in the last couple of negotiations, but it's still not addressed in an adequate way. and they're still not enough, especially from countries from the global north in the funds for damages in specifically in the global. but this loss, or actually brings that topic into the legal fear as well, because it addresses the issues that those who haven't contributed nearly nothing are left alone with the damages. and they have to pay for damages that they have not contributed. and in the legal argument, the plane gives really

a whole head to follow their shared common responsibility. that is the principal from the parents agreement. and namely those who have contributed most. and actually they have the financial means and the type technical means to reduce their emissions that they have to follow up with that you're also, i'm satisfied with wholesome, that current climate strategy. why they haven't tried the ts you mentioned. we also talked to them, we'd call them a range of questions. we always do that and engage with corporations. if we criticize them, they have answered this question. they have economic strategy, but the problem is they have reductions targets only per cement tongue. they produce a ton of demand, but what happened? their production increased in the last years. and so overall the emissions went up and only in 2021. again, the emissions they went up and this is just not in line with the limit of their

parents agreement on the 1.5 degree limit. and because we need absolute and drastic emission reductions though it cannot, it's not enough. if you only produce a little bit less, c o 2 per ton of them, and you produce an overall, how's he has produced more than $7000000000.00 of tons at seo tool. and it actually just externalize the cost to the public and to, and people in the global south, specifically the people on parent islands where to now pay for. do you think that this case, no matter what the result is? we'll set a precedent in some ways. but we need to defer case discount in 20 land so, so there will be these kind of questions the 1st time monitored. and that will be a president. what if we look into need to fear we have for instance, or a case in the netherlands again, shell coord really decided that she had to reduce their emissions. and we haven't

kind of similar or related case in a term court where the term court just traveled to peru to actually look at the impact of climate change, the probity there, it's a big movement of law. so it's on the way. and also these cases can inspire with chapters on how they decide nobody relieve them. thank you so much for joining us today. i thank you. and that's it for today's program as over be back tomorrow. at the same time, you're bent with every day for us and for our planet. a global ideas is on its way to bring you more conservation. how do we make cities greener? how can we protect animals and their habitats?

what to do with all our waste? we can make a difference by choosing reforestation over deforestation recycling over disposable smart new solutions over steam set in our ways, or is truly unique. and we know that, that uniqueness is what allows us to live and survive google ideas, the environmental series from global 3000 on d, w, and online with awe, big problems only growing shares of embattled indian adante group tank after a botched stock offering. market loss is now amount to $100000000.00, and even the indian central bank is now getting involved. we have more from our correspondence, also coming up with inflation reaching

a 48 year high crisis with pakistan is hoping a financial bailout package from the international monetary fund will finally be released and will go to spain, where people are outraged that price is for olive oil staple in spanish cooking have increased by 50 percent. i'm crystal program, bad news keep piling on for indian. a donnie group, the embattled conglomerate share as tank as it had to call off a mass of cher sale. adonis group market losses now top $100000000000.00 and india central bank is concerned about the impacts for the countries entire economy. gautama dani, just a few days ago, still smiling bravely though no longer the richest man in india, promising lavish investments in the israeli port of heifer despite the storm breaking over his empire. the acquisition of hype art also comes with that significant amount of.