philippines
Segovia et al. v. Climate Change Commission
On February 17, 2014, Antonio Oposa, Jr., with the support of Our Children’s Trust, filed a petition in the Philippine Supreme Court in Manila on behalf of a group of young people and the 98% of Philippines’ population without cars. The petition requested that the Court issue a uniquely Philippine legal instrument – a writ of kalikasan – which provides a remedy for Filipinos whose environmental rights have been violated. The petition demanded that one-half of the roads be set aside for citizens who do not drive because “roads are made for people, not cars.” The petition argued that the atmosphere is a “thing held in trust” as “a vital life-support system” and that the Philippine National Government has a public trust obligation to protect the atmosphere. These arguments were based on a Philippine Supreme Court landmark ruling from over twenty years ago declaring that the government has the responsibility to protect the environment for present and future generations. The petition sought an order directing the government to curb the emission of fossil fuels and to put together a time-bound action plan and allocate funds for the establishment of a ‘road sharing principle’ in infrastructure development. On March 7, 2017, the Philippine Supreme Court determined that the petitioners had standing to sue and to bring the case directly to the Supreme Court; however, the Court ultimately dismissed the case for failure to establish the required elements necessary for court-issued writs.
This case is similar to Juliana v. United States in that it utilized the atmospheric trust litigation theory, but the request for a court-ordered writ of kalikasan and the remedies sought for Filipino citizens without cars were unique to this case.
In re Greenpeace Southeast Asia and Others
In 2015, 18 Filipinos, Greenpeace Southeast Asia, and other organizations and individuals filed a petition with the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines asking it to investigate “the human rights implications of climate change and ocean acidification and the resulting rights violations in the Philippines” and “whether the investor-owned Carbon Majors have breached their responsibilities to respect the rights of the Filipino people.” The petition identified 47 publicly traded corporations, classifying them as Carbon Majors and including Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and BP, whose business activities have resulted in a substantial portion of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions since 1751.
On December 6, 2016, Our Children’s Trust submitted an amicus curiae brief to the Commission, arguing that, to protect the public trust, constitutional, and fundamental human rights of Filipinos and to avoid disproportionate climate impacts to Filipino children and future generations, the Commission should adopt a science-based standard for atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) levels that applies to the Carbon Majors, the Philippine government and other governments around the world. On March 19, 2018, Our Children’s Trust, as well as climate scientists Dr. James Hansen and Dr. Kevin E. Trenberth, submitted a Joint Summary of their testimony to the Commission. In the summary, Our Children’s Trust reaffirms the need for the Commission to declare the scientific standard to protect the fundamental, constitutional and human rights of Filipino children from the impacts of climate change. On December 9, 2019, the Commission released a statement asserting that the 47 investor-owned corporations could be found legally and morally responsible for human rights violations due to their conduct in causing climate change. The Commission also found that the requisite criminal intent may exist to hold companies liable under relevant civil and criminal laws in light of their long-standing efforts to deny responsibility and obstruct action on climate change.