European Court of Human Rights sets key climate precedent in Norway oil case

ISTANBUL

The European Court of Human Rights has issued a groundbreaking judgment that reshapes climate responsibility.

In Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway, two environmental groups and six activists claimed Norway violated their rights by approving oil exploration in the Barents Sea without assessing its climate impact.

The court found no rights violation but ruled that future oil and gas projects must evaluate their full global climate impact, including emissions from fuel burned abroad, before any new drilling begins.

“This judgment sets a powerful precedent: governments cannot approve projects causing irreversible climate harm without judicial scrutiny, and NGOs and individuals now have stronger legal grounds to challenge fossil fuel projects globally,” says Sebastien Duyck, an attorney for the Centre for International Environmental Law (CIEL), as reported by Euronews on Thursday.

Although the decision may seem modest at first, it carries substantial weight. The court made clear that states must evaluate the total climate impact of future oil and gas developments before approving them — even if, in this instance, the human-rights threshold was not deemed breached.

This obligation covers the total emissions from all related projects, as well as pollution generated when the extracted fossil fuels are ultimately burned, whether within the country or overseas.

“No ongoing Norwegian production of petroleum satisfies these requirements,” said Cathrine Hambro, a lawyer at the Norwegian Supreme Court.

As Clemens Kaupa, a law professor at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, told NU.nl: “The most important point is that climate impact must be taken into account in decisions. That’s something fossil fuel-producing countries have tried to avoid so far.”

The case dates back to 2016, when Greenpeace Nordic, Nature and Youth, and six activists challenged Norway’s move to open parts of the Barents Sea for oil exploration, arguing it violated their human rights. Norwegian courts recognized the climate risks but upheld the licenses, leading the plaintiffs to take their fight to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in 2021.

“This decision does not make the challenged projects any more viable – it just postpones the inevitable,” said Nikki Reisch of CIEL, adding that “expanding fossil fuel production in the face of an escalating climate emergency is legally indefensible.”