FROM POLICY TO COURTROOM: HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LEGAL ENFORCEMENT OF CLIMATE JUSTICE

Abstract

Climate change represents a multidimensional threat, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations and raising fundamental questions about justice, equity, and human rights. Litigation grounded in human rights has emerged as a pivotal tool for enforcing environmental accountability, bridging the gap between abstract climate policies and tangible protections for affected communities. This study examines the evolving role of human rights frameworks in climate litigation, highlighting how courts increasingly recognize the interdependence between environmental protection and the realization of rights such as life, health, and cultural integrity. By analyzing landmark cases including Urgenda v Netherlands, Milieudefensie v Shell, and Leghari v Pakistan the research demonstrates how legal action can compel states and corporations to adopt measures that mitigate climate impacts and uphold human dignity. It also addresses persistent challenges, such as establishing causation, navigating jurisdictional complexities, and ensuring equitable access to justice for marginalized groups. The paper argues that integrating scientific evidence with human rights claims enhances both the credibility and effectiveness of climate litigation. Moreover, community-led and grassroots actions play a crucial role in democratizing legal advocacy, ensuring that the voices of those most affected by climate change are heard. The study concludes that human rights-based litigation, while not a standalone solution, is essential for advancing environmental justice, promoting accountability, and fostering inclusive, sustainable climate governance.