Energy minister Claire Coutinho blasts European court over 'concerning' ruling (supported by Greta Thunberg) that politicians who fail to take enough action to tackle climate change are violating human rights

The Energy Secretary last night criticised Europe’s top human rights court after it ruled governments have a duty to protect people from climate change.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) judged that Switzerland’s weak climate policies violate fundamental human rights – its first such verdict against a state on the issue.

The case was brought by around 2,500 Swiss women with an average age of 74, who argued they were at greater risk of death from heatwaves. The ruling opens the door to further legal challenges in countries that are members of the Council of Europe, which includes the 27 EU nations as well as Britain and Turkey.

Claire Coutinho, Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, said she was ‘concerned’ about the court’s judgment and warned it should be elected politicians who make such decisions.

‘How we tackle climate change affects our economic, energy and national security. Elected politicians are best placed to make those decisions,’ she said.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) judged that Switzerland’s weak climate policies violate fundamental human rights – its first such verdict against a state on the issue.

Claire Coutinho, Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, said she was ‘concerned’ about the court’s judgment and warned it should be elected politicians who make such decisions.

Climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was in court for the ruling, said it was a ‘call to action’ and underscores ‘the importance of taking our national governments to court’.

‘I am proud of our achievements on climate change to date. The UK will make sure we play our part but in a pragmatic way that protects British families.’ It comes nearly two years after the same court blocked Boris Johnson’s plan to send an inaugural flight of asylum seekers to Rwanda at the 11th hour.

And last week, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told The Sun that Britain could quit the ECHR to get a grip on the small boats crisis. The ruling has prompted outrage from MPs and academics, who said the court is ‘blatantly politicised’ and that the decision sets a ‘worrying precedent’. The court ruled that Switzerland – which is committed to becoming climate neutral by 2050 – ‘had failed to comply with its duties’ to combat climate change and meet emissions targets. That, it said, was a violation of the rights of the group known as Senior Women for Climate Protection.

Judge Siofra O’Leary, the court’s president, said it would be up to governments to decide how to approach climate change obligations. Switzerland said it would study the decision to see what steps are needed.

Climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was in court for the ruling, said it was a ‘call to action’ and underscores ‘the importance of taking our national governments to court’.

Tim Eicke KC, the ECHR representative judge for the UK, said: ‘I fear that in this judgment the majority has gone beyond what is legitimate and permissible for this court to do and, unfortunately, in doing so, may well have achieved exactly the opposite effect to what was intended.’

David Bannerman, ex-Tory MEP for the East of England, described the ruling as ‘ridiculous’ and said the ECHR is ‘now blatantly politicised and not confined to justice’.

Danny Kruger, Conservative MP for Devizes, said the ECHR is ‘setting itself up as a legislator in place of elected governments’, adding: ‘We should leave.’

The court rejected two other similar cases on procedural grounds – one brought by young Portuguese people, and another by a French mayor that sought to force governments to reduce greenhouse gases.

Read more