Jan Šinágl angažovaný občan, nezávislý publicista

17.4.2024

I consider the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to be an example of activist justice, which, in the spirit of progressivist ideology, does not hesitate to ignore the laws of nature. The Earth's climate is undeniably changing, and has been since the very beginning of the existence of planet Earth, even when man was still an unknown creature. I am not going to address the scientific dispute as to whether or not human activity (in particular, the production of carbon dioxide) is currently the main cause of climate change, because - unlike progressivist ideologues - I know that I do not know.

What I do know is that European countries only account for around 8% of the Earth's carbon dioxide production. The share of the Swiss Confederation's industry in the total production of this gas on Earth will therefore probably only be in the order of a per mille. Therefore, even if, as a result of this 'groundbreaking' judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, Switzerland were to completely eliminate the production of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, this would not move the Earth's climate.

Moreover, to infer by any method of legal interpretation that the right to privacy and private life described in Article 8 ECHR includes the right not to be affected by climate change and creates an obligation on the Convention's Member States to ensure this right is unthinkable in a state or community of law. Unfortunately, it thus appears that the ECtHR judges rule in the following order: I have the result in front of me and I choose my reasoning accordingly to reach it.

The judgment in question therefore has the character of an ideological proclamation without any bearing on reality. In fact, justice that produces such decisions only devalues and destroys the prestige of these formerly respected social institutions and the people's respect for them, and is harmful to all in its consequences. Therefore, such products of justice really have nothing to do with law, the rule of law and justice.

The entire decision is, of course, nonsense and denies the meaning and principles of written law. It takes a good deal of judicial activism to slam Switzerland in particular for doing little for the environment.

The author is an independent senator

Zdeněk Hraba

https://neviditelnypes.lidovky.cz/politika/soud-pro-lidska-prava-priklad-aktivisticke-justice.A240416_160424_p_politika_nef#utm_source=email&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=lidovky.directmai

Komentovat články mohou pouze registrovaní uživatelé; prosím, zaregistrujte se (v levém sloupci zcela dole)