The ECtHR and climate change

The Grand Chamber’s ruling in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland [2024] ECHR 304, handed down on Tuesday, seems to have caused a (predictable) storm – and though nothing to do with “religion” specifically, it’s potentially very important in the wider area of human rights law.

In brief, the applicants argued that the Swiss authorities had been insufficiently diligent in the area of climate‑change mitigation and that their demographic group – elderly females – was particularly vulnerable to climate-induced heatwaves; they relied on Articles 2, 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention. The Court held by sixteen votes to one that there had been a violation of Article 8 (respect for private and family life). The Judge in respect of the UK, Tim Eicke, dissented on the violation of Article 8, though he agreed with his colleagues that there had been a violation of Article 6 (right to a fair trial).

Commenting on the judgment, Joshua Rozenberg suggests in A Lawyer Writes that

“… the ruling will now give further ammunition to those who think the UK should now leave the European Convention on Human Rights. Only the German-born British judge seems to have thought this through”.

And so it has come to pass. On the following day, The Times reported that

“There are growing calls among Conservative MPs to quit the ECHR following a landmark ruling by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on Tuesday that governments have a duty to protect people from climate change … The latest polling has found that half of Conservative voters believe Britain should quit the ECHR”.

The report, however, claims that “at least 12 ministers who attend cabinet would oppose any move to leave the ECHR altogether, double the number who are understood to be supportive of leaving the Convention”. Hmmm.

Antisemitism and French criminal law

In Allouche v France [2024] ECHR 305  Ms Allouche, who is Jewish, found herself in a disturbing relationship with one B, a bartender in a café near her workplace, which ended with him sending her antisemitic e-mail threats of violence, rape and death. She argued successfully that the prosecuting authorities had ignored the antisemitic aspects of the case. We will post a note tomorrow.

Re St Michael Basingstoke [2024] ECC Win 2

The proposed reordering works for the Grade I church of St Michael Basingstoke set out in the Petitioners’ Statement of Needs included the following justification for the removal of the pulpit: “To allow for our choir to both fit on the platform and also from what we have learnt in our trials, to be heard, we need the choir in front of the arch and extending to the sides … This is not used in any of our services and hasn’t been for many years, but it sits in exactly the space that the choir will need to be to make a success of their new position”. 

Ormondroyd Ch was unconvinced by the justification. 

Use of documents in CDM proceedings

In her ruling issued on 8 April 2024, de Mestre Ch signalled an end to further consideration of the Tribunal Decision The Revd Canon Richard Peers, 21 March 2024: the proceedings have now concluded with the complaint being dismissed; the complainant does not appear to wish to pursue any further action; and in her judgment, “it would be disproportionate to conduct any such investigation; there is no public interest in doing so in these circumstances nor is it in furtherance of the overriding objective to prolong this matter – to the contrary, there is a significant need for finality in these proceedings” [17].

However, she indicated, “It may be necessary in another case to investigate the precise ambit of the Code of Practice and the Statutory Guidance (and the Rules) and how they interact but that is not warranted here” [14]. In its February update on the development of the Clergy Conduct Measure, General Synod was informed that the new Measure was expected to come into operation in early 2026.

Quick links

• Eva Brems, Strasbourg Observers: The single judge and the single-sentence motivation (2): The bewildering dismissal of Asmeta v France: on hijabs and laïcité.
• Martin Davie, Reflections of an Anglican Theologian: Would a Provincial solution require Parliamentary approval?: on the creation of a third province to resolve the Church of England’s current impasse over issues of human sexuality as proposed by the Church of England Evangelical Council.
• Elijah Granet and Geert van Calster, Oxford Human Rights Hub: The Unkindest Cut of All? The ECtHR Declines to Intervene on Religious Slaughter: on Executief van de Moslims van België and Others v Belgium [2024] ECHR 137, which we noted here.
• Farrah Raza, Oxford Human Rights Hub: The UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief: Key reports, themes, and issues.
• Tim Wyatt, The Critical Friend: Weaponisation in the Church of England: recent events concerning Oxford and Llandaff Cathedrals “[cutting] through the legal niceties”.

And finally…