Plaintiffs, lawyers and activists gather outside the South Korean Constitutional Court in Seoul ahead of a hearing in a climate change lawsuit on Tuesday, April 23, 2024.
Anthony Kuhn/Anthony Kuhn
hide caption
toggle caption
Anthony Kuhn/Anthony Kuhn
Plaintiffs, lawyers and activists gather outside the South Korean Constitutional Court in Seoul ahead of a hearing in a climate change lawsuit on Tuesday, April 23, 2024.
Anthony Kuhn/Anthony Kuhn
SEOUL — A 17-month-old woodpecker giggled, sending ripples of laughter through the crowd as plaintiffs, lawyers and activists chanted slogans outside South Korea's Constitutional Court on Tuesday.
Woodpecker is the nickname of Choi Hee-woo, the youngest of the more than 250 plaintiffs involved in the Woodpecker case. Al. v. South Korea. His is one of four petitions filed since 2020 that the court is considering together as a landmark case.
The plaintiffs allege that the government is violating people's human rights by failing to effectively address climate change.
Although other cases are ongoing elsewhere, this will be the first hearing in Asia, and the plaintiffs say that if the court decides, it will likely be the first in Asia as well. It has said.
Woodpecker's mother and legal representative, Lee Dong-hyun, made him the plaintiff while he was still in her womb. She said the South Korean government is deferring the task of reducing carbon emissions to future administrations and younger generations.
“The more we think this mission can be delayed now, the greater the burden will be on our future generations,” she says. “I think that's the same thing as passing on debt to your children.”
Environmentalists criticize carbon emissions reduction targets
Plaintiffs argue that South Korea's goal to reduce carbon emissions by 40% by 2030 compared to 2018 levels is insufficient, will lead to catastrophic climate change, and violates constitutional rights.
Environmental groups point out that South Korea's targets are less ambitious because reduction targets are compared to 2018 levels, while other targets are compared to pre-2010 levels.
A human rights monitoring group in South Korea submitted an opinion to the government stating that climate change is a human rights issue and therefore the government has an obligation to protect its citizens from climate change.
Lee said climate change is making it harder for parents to farm and summer heat waves keep children away from play areas, “ultimately robbing children of their right to grow up healthy.”
South Korea revised its industrial sector emissions targets downward last year. The government insisted at the hearing that it is doing everything it can to minimize climate change while supporting the domestic economy, which is highly dependent on fossil fuels and carbon-intensive industries such as cars and semiconductors. It seems that then.
Constitutional Court President Lee Jong-seok said, “The court recognizes the importance and public interest of this case, and will work hard to ensure thorough deliberation.''
Lee Dong-hyun says he finds it difficult to fight climate change as an individual. She is trying to organize her fellow countrymen to save electricity, but she says without fundamental reforms, South Korea will not be able to achieve even modest goals.
“That's why I think it's time for governments to restructure industry and consumption in ways that reduce carbon emissions,” she argues.
The Constitution guarantees the right to a healthy environment
U.S. attorney Tae Kwaag, who is representing middle school and high school students in a separate petition to the court, said lawyers considered filing a civil or administrative lawsuit.
But they decided to go to the Constitutional Court, partly because it is seen as free from political interference, but also because this case is fundamentally about constitutional rights. Yes, he says.
Specifically, he points out that Article 35 of the Korean Constitution guarantees the people the right to a healthy environment.
“We're not asking for damages. All we're really asking is for the court to say what they think should be done for the younger generation.” he says.
Kwaag argues that forcing younger generations to reduce their carbon emissions in order to solve a crisis caused by older generations' carbon emissions is a form of discrimination.
The hearings began two weeks after the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government was violating the rights of its citizens by not taking sufficient measures to combat climate change.
“If the Constitutional Court declares current climate laws unconstitutional, it could set a precedent for other countries in Asia to follow,” Kwaag said.
NPR's Se Eun Gong contributed to this report in Seoul.
Gong Se-woon
