The environment in The Netherlands is obliged to take measures to ensure that the emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 by at least one-quarter has decreased compared to 1990 levels. The supreme court has given the klimaatzaak, which was filed by the duurzaamheidsorganisatie Urgenda. The verdict was for the audience to loud applause. “I just can’t get around it”, said the Dutch klimaatminister Eric Wiebes.
As in the judgment of the highest court of the land has been in the legal battle between the Urgenda and the government is coming to an end. The klimaatzaak was the world’s first of its kind, and internationally, attracting a lot of interest. In 2015, it was Urgenda for the first time to the court of law. The judgment is held before the court and is now final.
you can also Read Snelheidsverlaging to 100 km/h in the Netherlands in march, to
The government had, in the court of cassation has gone, because it is of the opinion that it is not right, but politics is about the rate at which the emissions must be starting to take off. “The supreme court has held that this argument was not valid. So in that view, I can not continue to adhere to,” returns the minister, Eric Wiebes (VVD) would increase.
take the Appropriate measures to counter the effects of climate change
The supreme court conrmed the decision of the court of justice held that the state has the responsibility to take appropriate measures to ensure that the Dutch population is protected against the effects of dangerous climate change. It’s going to be extreme heat, extreme rainfall, the disruption of eco-systems and sea-level rise”, summed up the High Council president.
“The lives, well-being, as well as the habitat of the many threatened species that may occur in a section already for this,” concluded the Council, which had argued that, under the umbrella of the United Nations, each country is only a small part is responsible for it. “On the grounds that their own emissions are only slight, it may be a country, therefore, is not relieved of the responsibility to take action.”
for example, If the authorities are not doing enough to achieve climate change is to be avoided, then the court can help to protect civilians.
Marjan Minnesma, director of Urgenda
Urgenda has been “very pleased” with the ruling. The court, according to the managing director Marjan Minnesma made it clear that the emissions reductions of its basis in human rights and that the government is there for the need to focus on. “This not only helps to speed it up, but it will give people around the world hope. If the government is not doing enough to achieve climate change is to be avoided, then the court can help to protect civilians,” said Minnesma.Other environmental groups such as Greenpeace, and the left-wing opposition parties have responded to be satisfied.
Dutch minister of environment, Eric Wiebes said they remain committed to reduce CO2 emissions in the following year and 25 per cent, to shrink compared to the 1990 level. The decision of the supreme court on Friday that the state is obliged to do so, that this is one of the aims is, “where I just can’t get around it,” he says. “The deployment continues to the step-by-step, with the new measures, and that 25 per cent.”
the Belgian Klimaatzaak
in Belgium, has won the ” The Klimaatzaak of the four competent authorities for the right to have an ambitious climate change policies and technologies. After a great deal of time in 2020, with a ruling expected in this case.
