Neïla Mangin Maïza

Landmark ruling: Canadian corporations may be held liable for breaches of international human rights law says the Supreme Court!

On February 28, 2020, the Canadian Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in the Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd case, dismissing Nevsun’s motion to strike, considering that “it is not plain and obvious that corporations today enjoy a blanket exclusion under customary international law from direct liability for violations of obligatory, definable, and universal norms of international law”.

Landmark settlement: ANZ bank compensating displaced Cambodian farmers by a client’s project it financed

The settlement reached in February 2020 by Equitable Cambodia and Inclusive Development International on behalf of Cambodian victims and ANZ bank, under the auspices of the Australian National Contact Point (AusNCP) is the first of its kind for the global banking industry.

In a joint statement published on 27 February 2020, “ANZ recognises the continuing hardships faced by the affected communities, and has agreed to pay the profit it earned from the loan, to the affected communities”.

Expulsions backed up by the ECHR, denying obstacles faced by sub-Saharan migrants

On 13 February 2020, the Grand Chamber of the European Court on Human Rights (ECtHR) dismissed the claim of two migrants alleging that their removal from Spain without having their situation individually examined by the authorities was a violation of Article 4 of Protocol No.4 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 13 ECHR in the N.D and N.T v. Spain case.

The protection of the environment, “mankind common heritage” guaranteed beyond French borders

On 31 January 2020, the French Constitutional Court ruled (in French) that the protection of the environment, principle enshrined in the preamble of the Environment Charter, constitutes a constitutional goal. Hence, its application can lead to the limitation of the freedom of entrepreneurship, even if the adverse consequences of the business activities carried out are extraterritorial.

Denied asylum-seekers’ right to life must be protected from climate change says the Human Rights Committee

On 7 January 2020, the UN Human Rights Committee for the first time ruled on the consequences of climate change in the context of refugee status’ denial, and in regards to the right to life enshrined in Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Hard blow for climate change litigation in the US

On 17 January 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion on the Kelsey Rose Juliana v. United States case filled by 21 young citizens, an environmental organisation and a representative of future generations. By a majority of two judges, the Court dismissed the claim alleging that the government has violated claimants’ constitutional rights to life, liberty, property and the public trust doctrine by permitting, authorising, and subsidising fossil fuel use despite irreversible consequences regarding climate change.

Companies calling for EU regulation on due diligence on business and human rights !

On December 2, 2019, some of the world’s largest chocolate companies called the European Union (EU) to adopt a regulation placing a due diligence obligation on all companies importing cocoa or cocoa products on the European market.

Human rights as a means of fighting climate change

On 20 December 2019, the Dutch Supreme Court issued a landmark judgement upholding the Court of Appeal’s decision in the Urgenda Foundation v. Netherlands case. The class action initiated by 900 Dutch citizens had as a core question whether the State had a duty of care to protect its citizens against the imminent danger caused by climate change. By compelling the State to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25% compared to 1990 by the end of 2020, the Supreme Court answered the question positively.