Friends of the Earth Germany, Association of Solar Supporters, and Others v. Germany

For a German language version, see: Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz (BUND), Solarenergie-Förderverein Deutschland e.V. (SFV) und Weitere v. Deutschland

In November 2018, the environmental organisation Friends of the Earth Germany filed a constitutional complaint against the German government. This complaint claimed that plaintiffs' fundamental human rights were violated by Germany's failure to meet both its national greenhouse gas emission reduction goals as well as the EU 2020 climate and energy targets. The plaintiffs of this lawsuit are given by the German member of the Friends of the Earth network Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz (BUND), the Association of Solar Supporters (Solarenergie-Förderverein Deutschland e.V. (SFV)) and various individual plaintiffs, such as actor Hannes Jaennicke, former member of the Bundestag Josef Göppel (CSU) and professor Volker Quaschning of the Hochschule für Technik und Wirtschaft Berlin, to name a few.

Background
The lawsuit was financed by donations and SFV's own funds. It is represented by Dr. Franziska Heß, Baumann Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaftsgesellschaft mbB, and Prof. Dr. Dr. Felix Ekardt of the Sustainability and Climate Policy Research Centre, who has prepared the lawsuit for the SFV since 2010 together with several human rights experts. Initiatives such as the Round Table Renewable Energies continue to advocate for 100 per cent renewable energies by 2030 with the participation of the SFV.

Relevant Law and Principles

 * Art. 2, para. 1 of the German Constitution: The right to general freedom of action
 * Art. 2.1 of the German Constitution: The right to the ecological minimum subsistence level (in conj. with Art. 1, para. 1 GG, Art 20a GG, and Art. 47 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (complainants re 12. and 13.))
 * Art. 2.2 of the German Constitution: The right to life and physical integrity
 * Art. 14.1 of the German Constitution: The right to protection of property
 * Art. 20, para. 3 of the German Constitution: The principle of materiality and the reservation of parliamentary rights (for all complainants)

Status
In the spring of 2021, the Federal Constitutional Court declared the climate lawsuit to be partially justified.

Takeaways
The plaintiffs of this case consider the ruling a great success. With its decision, the Court ultimately declared the 1.5-degree limit of the Paris Climate Agreement to be constitutionally binding. Fundamental freedom and the state goal of environmental protection obligate the legislature to develop a forward-looking plan to deal carefully with the residual emissions.

"This ruling is a breakthrough," says Professor Felix Ekardt, who represented the lawsuit together with Franziska Heß, a specialist lawyer for administrative law. "For the first time, an environmental lawsuit before the German Federal Constitutional Court has been successful. Policymakers will have to make massive improvements and set significantly more ambitious targets and instruments. Our lawsuit has shown that, in terms of fundamental rights, zero emissions are necessary dramatically earlier than previously envisaged and that the Paris target is binding in terms of fundamental rights. For the climate, however, the ruling is still too little, despite all the positive aspects, because it does not demand prompt zero emissions with the necessary clarity. We will examine whether we should also file an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights."

In any case, the fact that the Court granted the complaint certainly sets a precedent beyond German borders. Such a verdict highlights that this issue does not demonstrate a mere political favour of a certain majority but rather a severe large scale human rights violation.

Links

 * BUND, Friends of the Earth Germany
 * Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
 * Sabin Center for Climate Change Law
 * SFV, Association of Solar Supporters Germany