Demanding justice- Corporate responsibility for Climate Change impacts on Human Rights

Sammanfattning: Climate change is one of the most complex challenges of our time, as its consequences are reflected in a variety of social and political areas that are interlinked. The problem of 'climate change' has evolved from an environmental problem, to a political issue and, ultimately to an object of jurisprudence. This process consequently entails a change in the relevant and actors involved therein. The relationships between, on the one hand, companies on climate change and, on the other, climate change on human rights are clear and largely undisputed. This paper deals with the opportunities and challenges to transform this causal chain into a command for corporations to assume environmental responsibility. The thesis aims to understand how fossil fuel companies can be held accountable for their impact on human rights violations through their contribution to climate change. Investigating: In what way may the human rights-based approach be applied in order to hold companies accountable for their contribution to climate change. For a comprehensive analysis of this issue, an integrated approach is necessary, examining the two major relevant UN framework agreements, namely Professor John Knox’ Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment, and Professor John Ruggie’s Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP), through the lens of climate justice theory. Climate justice theory applies mechanisms of distributive justice under the consideration of global, intergenerational and ecological justice. The chosen case study ‘Saúl v. RWE’ describes a 'business and climate change' conflict. The analysis draws on the procedure and results. In order to capture different dimensions as well as to assess convergence of policy and practice. Methodologically, human rights remain at the center of the analysis. The analysis of the two frameworks shows two main results. First, by focusing on rights infringements through climate change, plaintiffs are given a tool to approach injustices directly and concretely. Second, the obligation of ‘due diligence’ for companies puts businesses directly into relation with harm done and can therefore be used as supporting the argument of proximity and legal causation. It is clear that the history of climate lawsuits is evolving rapidly and comprehensively. Individual victims, as well as alliances of people and whole states go to court to enforce climate justice. Enforcing climate justice is well received by large parts of the population worldwide and receives great legal support. In general, cases are increasingly successful in representing the causal context of climate change impact on human rights, as will be shown in Saúl’s case as well. On a normative basis, assumption of responsibility on the part of companies is increasingly demanded and the legal way to claim it is given, however, this way must now be taken.