En grön rättighet eller grönare rättigheter? – En undersökning av människoskyddet med avseende på miljöfaktorer inom ramen för EKMR

Sammanfattning: The environment and climate change as well as human rights have both been international concerns for a long time. Lately there has arisen a discussion about the connection between these two. The discussion has above all been about the impact that the environment has on humans. Pollution, natural disasters, industrial emissions, etc. are factors that can contribute to the violation of human rights. This problem has been handled differently internationally, regionally and nationally. One alternative is to create a new – green – right to a healthy or good environment in a new or existing rights catalog. There are a few examples of this being done. Another way is to indirectly bring in an environmental right by using existing human rights. This has been called the greening of human rights. The focus of this work is the European Court of Human Rights, the court, and the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, ECHR. In the ECHR there is no direct environmental right. Instead an indirect environmental right has been developed through the case law of the court. The Committee of Ministers have, despite the protection that thereby has been developed, received recommendations for including a direct environmental right in the ECHR. The Committee of Ministers have not followed these recommendations. The purpose of this thesis is to examine if a direct substantive environmental rights would improve the protection for people in Europe, and if such a right should be introduced in the ECHR. This is done by, among other things, looking at a case from the African Commission where a direct environmental right is used, and studying some of the arguments that have been made in the discussion about environmental rights. A review of the case law of the court is also done to see if the protection against violations with an environmental aspect is satisfying. In the analysis, I do a comparison where I see if the situations that, in the case law of the court was seen to fall outside the protection, would be protected if the ECHR included a direct substantive environmental right. By looking at the arguments in the paper I also discuss if a direct substantive environmental right has a place in the ECHR. Finally, I conclude that a direct substantive environmental right would probably lead to a slight improvement of the protection of the people in Europe looking at violations with an environmental aspect. I can also conclude that an environmental right does have a place in the ECHR. It would also be an important statement for Europe that they are taking the environmental threat and its impact on humans seriously. The thesis conclusion is consequently that a direct substantive environmental right should be included in the ECHR.