Menu Menu

South Korean activists win climate case against their government

A judge has ruled South Korea’s current climate goals as ‘unconstitutional,’ securing a landmark victory for young environmental activists who launched the case. The first-of-its-kind case in South Asia could set a precedent for other nations in the region.

Climate cases are popping up all over the world, but today’s ruling marks the first win of its kind to occur in South East Asia.

South Korea’s government has been ordered by the Constitutional Court to ramp up its environmental policies, more specifically, to provide greater details on how it aims to reach its 2049 climate goals.

This is all thanks to 254 local activists, who were plaintiffs in the case. Back in 2020 – when most of them were children of teenagers – they filed the lawsuit, accusing their leaders of violating their human rights by failing to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Although the court did not require the government to improve the current strategy for its 2030 climate goals, it did agree that there needs more robust plans for reaching carbon neutrality between the years of 2031 and 2049.

This is the first ever legal case in East Asia to challenge national climate policies – and it could set a precedent for other nations in the region.

What specific legal complaints did the activists make?

Four climate cases were raised by the young activists in 2020.

They first argued that South Korea’s current goal of cutting carbon emissions by 35 percent from 2018 to 2030 was inadequate to manage the broad and serious impacts of climate change. They also accused the government of having no concrete plans to reach these objectives.

Next, they raised the alarm on the country’s lack of plans to reduce emissions after 2031. This was particularly concerning, as South Korea has claimed it will achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

Finally, they stated that all of these acts were a violation of their human rights, as well as the rights of all people in the country. This relaxed attitude towards climate policy poses a risk to future generations, leaving them unprotected from a world fraught by a diminishing environment.

Speaking of the ruling, Youn Se-jong, the plaintiff’s lawyers said, ‘With today’s ruling, we have confirmed that climate change is a matter of our fundamental rights and that everyone has the right to be safe from it.’

What happens next?

The South Korean government has yet to comment, but its obligation to act is expected to make waves across the South East Asian continent.

Around the world, cases related to environmental destruction and inadequate climate policies are being filed with increasing frequency. What’s pleasantly surprising is that judges are agreeing with the claims of individuals, activists, and groups.

For example, a group of senior Swiss women won a climate case against the Strasbourg government in the EU Court of Human Rights in April. Last year, a group of sixteen young people in the US won an environmental case against Montana state officials.

For environmental activists around the world, such success stories will likely be used as inspiration and fuel to press their own governments to act against climate change.

Accessibility