– We believe in victory because we have a Supreme Court verdict, the Constitution, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and climate science behind us. Therefore, we believe that the court will find the decisions invalid, says Frode Pleym, head of Greenpeace. On Tuesday morning, Greenpeace and Nature and Youth met in the Oslo district court for a new court settlement against the state of Norway. – We have met the state in court before, and we would prefer not to do so, but we have no choice, says Pleym. Leader of Greenpeace, Frode Pleym, believes in victory in the new climate lawsuit against the state. Photo: Rasmus Berg The lawsuit concerns the government’s approval of plans for the development and operation of the new oil fields Tyrving, Breidablikk and Yggdrasil in the North Sea. The lawsuit from the environmental organizations is a continuation of the first climate lawsuit, which went through three rounds of court from 2017-2020. Must investigate global climate impacts In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that the state must assess the global climate consequences before approving new oil projects. Greenpeace and Nature and Youth believe that such assessments have not been made, or are insufficient, before the new fields were approved. – Today, the climate effect of oil extraction is not assessed. And it is very serious, says head of Nature and Youth, Gina Gylver. Photo: Kjartan Rørslett / news – This case is about the state ignoring a Supreme Court judgment. The state gives permission for new oil fields without assessing the consequences, as the Supreme Court requires, says Gylver to news. The organizations believe that the state not only has the right, but also the duty to refuse new oil fields for reasons of climate and environment, and that the state is obliged to investigate the global climate effects of new oil fields before these are approved. – The goal is for Norwegian oil management to change, so that it is in line with the Supreme Court’s judgment, says Gylver. The environmental organizations base their interpretation on an investigation by the Norwegian Institution for Human Rights (NIM). They have also asked for a temporary injunction, which means that the development must be put on hold until the matter is finally settled in the judiciary. The state acquitted in 2020 In 2020, the environmental organizations did not prevail in the Supreme Court with the claim that the allocation of new oil fields in the Barents Sea was in violation of the Constitution’s environmental section. In the lawsuit, the state was acquitted on all counts. – When we lost in the Supreme Court, it was a crushing loss that caused many to lose a little faith in the legal system. Maybe it was naive, but we had won many victories in the previous court rounds, which we did not win in the Supreme Court, says Gina Gylver, head of Nature and Youth. The Supreme Court unanimously held that the awarding of oil licenses in the Barents Sea in 2016 was a breach of neither the environmental clause of the Constitution nor the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as the plaintiffs claimed. The court believed that it is primarily if the state does not implement climate measures that the environmental clause can be used. The judges pointed out, among other things, that the state has implemented a number of climate measures, and set targets to reduce emissions. With respect to children The constitution and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child require that the best interests of children be taken into account in matters that concern them. The environmental organizations point out that this must also apply in decisions about climate and oil management, and that the authorities are obliged to weigh the consequences of climate change against, for example, short-term gains from oil extraction. As the consequences for children and young people have not been taken into account in the assessment of the three oil fields, the environmental organizations believe that the approvals are also invalid on this point. The Ministry of Petroleum and Energy believes that the approvals that have been granted do not conflict with the requirements of the Supreme Court. – Does not conflict with the constitution The then state secretary in the Ministry of Oil and Energy, Andreas Bjelland Eriksen (Ap,) said in June that the government has done thorough work to follow up the Supreme Court’s judgment. Photo: Amanda Iversen Orlich The Ministry of Oil and Energy believes that the approvals for the development and operation of the new oil and gas fields do not conflict with the constitution. – At the same time, it is the environmental organizations’ right to try this in court, said then State Secretary in the Ministry of Oil and Energy, Andreas Bjelland Eriksen (Ap), when the new lawsuit became known in June. Government attorney Gøran Østerman Thengs tells news that the permits are valid. – The state believes that the procedural rules have been followed, and that incineration abroad is included in the assessments. We believe that no errors can be detected here, says Thengs. The case will be finished in court on Wednesday 6 December.
ttn-69
The state meets the court in environmental organizations in a new climate lawsuit – news Norway – Overview of news from different parts of the country
