The Climate Docket

WHAT WE COVER:

  • Liability Litigation
    • Baltimore Lawsuit
    • California Climate Lawsuits
    • Colorado Lawsuit
    • Mass. v. Exxon
    • New York City Lawsuit
    • Rhode Island Lawsuit
    • Other Suits
  • Access to Courts
    • Liability Waivers
    • State Legislation
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Powered by Genesis

You are here: Home / International / Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules
Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules

Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules

December 9, 2019 Filed Under: Featured, International

print

By Isabella Kaminski

The world’s biggest polluters could be held legally liable for their contributions to climate change, a major national inquiry into the links between climate and human rights has concluded.

The Philippines’ Commission on Human Rights announced its conclusion on Monday following a nearly three-year investigation into whether 47 of the world’s biggest fossil fuel firms—known as the Carbon Majors—could be held accountable for violating the rights of  its citizens for the damage caused by global warming. The commission was responding to a 2016 petition from Greenpeace South-East Asia and other local groups.

Commissioner Roberto Eugenio T. Cadiz said the commission found these companies, which include ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and Repsol, played a clear role in anthropogenic climate change and could be held legally liable for its impacts. He made the announcement during the United Nations climate talks in Madrid (COP25).

Legal responsibility for climate damage is not covered by current international human rights law, Cadiz said the commission had found, but fossil fuel companies have a “clear moral responsibility.” He said it would be up to individual countries to pass strong legislation and establish legal liability in their courts, but that there was clear scope under existing civil law in the Philippines to take action.

Cadiz said it may also be possible to hold companies criminally accountable “where they have been clearly proved to have engaged in acts of obstruction and willful obfuscation.”

The report also concludes that carbon majors “definitely have an obligation to respect human rights” as enunciated under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and a clear responsibility to invest in clean energy.

The commission’s findings had originally been due last summer. Cadiz told Climate Liability News that commissioners agreed with the general conclusions but were still wrangling over details regarding liability, and the final report would be published by the end of the year.

Yeb Saño, executive director of Greenpeace South-East Asia and one of the petitioners in the inquiry—formerly a climate negotiator for the Philippines—told Climate Liability news he was very pleased by commission’s conclusions, which he said were stronger than expected.

Carroll Muffett, president of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), said the commission’s recognition that there is evidence of criminal intent in the companies’ climate denial and obstruction is “particularly significant and a major development for the carbon majors.”

“Both for civil and criminal liability in jurisdictions around the world, the commission’s findings in this inquiry represent not an end of the legal investigations into carbon majors companies but a major new beginning for them,” Muffett said.

The commission’s recommendations do not carry direct legal weight. But they could lead to tougher regulations and put pressure on companies to cut their emissions in the Philippines and elsewhere. “Our findings can be relied upon as a precedent for parties that seek social justice on the issue of climate change,” Cadiz said during another event at COP25.

Cadiz said national human rights institutions are “ideally situated to deal on issues that regular courts would normally not touch or are not familiar with.”

When the commission began its investigation in 2016, Cadiz said the regular judicial system provided no clear precedent on the issue. “There was no case that we could look into where climate change has been framed as a human rights issue,” he said. “But because we are a national human rights institution, we have more leeway in being creative and imaginative in how we promote human rights. We were able to create our own processes.” 

The commission held hearings in Manila, New York and London, where evidence was presented by climate scientists, legal experts, academics and survivors of climate-related disasters. Recognizing that climate change is a global issue with no territorial boundaries,  “there was nothing to stop us turning it into a global conversation,” Cadiz said.

Human rights have become a hot topic at COP25, where heated discussions have been held about how to ensure negotiations on carbon market rules and loss and damage provisions respect the wider ethical dimensions of climate change. 

A CIEL report  released last week found a growing number of explicit and implicit references to human rights in climate agreements and policies adopted under the adopted under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

“This intersection is also recognized by various human rights bodies, including treaty bodies, UN special procedures mandate holders, courts, and national human rights institutions,” it said.

Also speaking at COP25, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet said climate change and environmental degradation “directly and indirectly interfere with the enjoyment of all human rights” and noted that governments and the general public are increasingly seeking to hold businesses accountable for the climate crisis. 

“Across the world, people and communities have taken to the streets and used strategic litigation to demand climate justice, and these movements can only grow.”

This movement had met “considerable resistance” from the corporate world, Bachelet said, with large fossil fuel producers undermining scientific work on climate change and international action.

Both Bachelet and Cadiz stressed that it was important to examine the role of state-owned fossil fuel firms as well as privately owned companies.

“If you just hit the private carbon majors then state-owned cabron majors will take up the slack,” Cadiz said. He said they “must also be held accountable for respecting and being guided by the… Paris Agreement and the IPCC.” 

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: Featured, International

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Trackbacks

  1. Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules – Enjeux énergies et environnement says:
    December 9, 2019 at 5:47 pm

    […] By Isabella Kaminski, Climate Liability News. Originally published on Climate Liability News. […]

  2. Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules | Climate Change says:
    December 10, 2019 at 4:46 am

    […] By Isabella Kaminski, Climate Liability News. Originally published on Climate Liability News. […]

  3. Oilsands Firms ‘Morally Responsible’ for Deaths and Destruction from Climate Disasters – Olduvai.ca says:
    December 18, 2019 at 10:22 am

    […] the commission cannot make legal rulings, it found that the fossil fuel companies under investigation are “morally responsible” for death and […]

  4. Historic Urgenda climate ruling upheld by Dutch Supreme Court says:
    December 20, 2019 at 9:34 am

    […] Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission… […]

  5. Obstruction and obfuscation by fossil fuel companies? | Saxe Facts says:
    December 25, 2019 at 8:20 pm

    […] December 2019, Commissioner Roberto Cadiz told COP25 that the three-year Philippines Human Rights Commission National Inquiry on Climate Change will […]

  6. Will Carbon Majors have to pay for climate damage? Part 4 of 4 | Saxe Facts says:
    January 22, 2020 at 4:55 pm

    […] Commission National Inquiry on Climate Change releases its report. In December 2019, Commissioner Roberto Cadiz told COP25 that the Commissioners have made their decision: the 47 biggest Carbon Majors have […]

  7. Can legal action force governments and businesses to respond to climate change? – Australia News and Jobs says:
    February 12, 2020 at 6:31 pm

    […] a few weeks earlier, the Commission of Human Right in the Philippines issued another historic finding, concluding that the world’s largest fossil fuel companies — known as carbon majors — […]

  8. Can legal action force governments and businesses to respond to climate change? – ABC News – SWDS says:
    February 13, 2020 at 2:53 am

    […] a few weeks earlier, the Commission of Human Right in the Philippines issued another historic finding, concluding that the world’s largest fossil fuel companies — known as carbon majors — […]

  9. OilWire #20: Big Oil capex stays 99.2% fossil; Wet’suwet’en resist GasLink pipeline; Total sued over climate – Global Gas & Oil Network says:
    April 21, 2020 at 6:28 pm

    […] Rights announced a landmark conclusion: that the 47 investor-owned “carbon majors” can be held legally liable for human rights violations stemming from climate […]

  10. When investing in oil loses money | Saxe Facts says:
    April 28, 2020 at 5:52 pm

    […] Commission National Inquiry on Climate Change releases its report. In December 2019, Commissioner Roberto Cadiz told COP25 that the Commissioners have made their decision: the 47 biggest Carbon Majors have […]

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Latest News

Justice Dept. to Argue on Side of Oil Companies in Supreme Court Hearing

By Karen Savage The acting solicitor general will be allowed time to argue in support of ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and nearly two dozen other companies next week during oral arguments before … [Read More...]

Recent Posts

  • Colorado Judge Rejects Oil Companies’ Attempt to Move Climate Case
  • Biden’s DOJ Could Help Swing Momentum Around Climate Cases
  • Supreme Court Questions Oil Companies’ Tactics to Shake Climate Cases
  • Will Amy Coney Barrett, Whose Father Was a Shell Attorney for Decades, Recuse from Climate Suit?

Most Popular

  • Toronto Will Explore Suing Big Oil for Climate Costs
  • Dutch Court Upholds Urgenda, Says Government Must Reduce Emissions
  • BP Accused of 'Greenwashing' and Deceiving Public With Renewable Energy Ads
  • Judge Agrees to Divest from Exxon Before New York's Climate Fraud Case
  • What Oil Companies Knew About Climate Change and When: A Timeline

Categories

  • Access to Courts
  • Baltimore Lawsuit
  • California Climate Lawsuits
  • Charleston, S.C. Lawsuit
  • Colorado Lawsuit
  • Connecticut Lawsuit
  • Delaware Lawsuit
  • Exxon Climate Investigation
  • Featured
  • Hoboken Lawsuit
  • International
  • Latest News
  • Liability Litigation
  • Liability Waivers
  • Mass. v. Exxon
  • Minnesota Lawsuit
  • New York City Lawsuit
  • Other Suits
  • Politics
  • Rhode Island Lawsuit
  • State Legislation
  • Uncategorized
  • Washington DC Lawsuit

Follow us

  • View climatedocket’s profile on Facebook
  • View climatedocket’s profile on Twitter

RSS

RSS Feed RSS - Posts

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.