当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Human Rights Practice › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The Political Ecology of Climate Remedies in Latin America and the Caribbean: Comparing Compliance between National and Inter-American Litigation
Journal of Human Rights Practice Pub Date : 2024-01-18 , DOI: 10.1093/jhuman/huad057
Juan Auz

The climate crisis will continue to affect human and natural systems across Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Undoubtedly, this jeopardizes entire communities’ enjoyment of human rights. In that context, the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) is expected to respond, particularly since its organs have jurisdiction to order remedies over most LAC countries, provided they determine a rights violation. Despite the growing number of domestic human rights-based climate cases in the region, the organs of the IAHRS have yet to adjudicate and order remedies in a case concerning the climate crisis. Against this backdrop, this article inquires how to understand climate remedies from a political ecology perspective to capture the LAC climate litigation experience. Additionally, the article asks what the challenges of implementing such remedies may be. To answer these questions, first, it compares the remedial approaches of domestic courts in six finally decided climate-related cases with those of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) in ‘anti-extractivist’ cases. Second, it applies a political ecology lens to understand the elements that might hinder the implementation of the identified remedies. The article argues that the socioeconomic cost for States largely determines remedial compliance in domestic climate litigation and the IACtHR’s anti-extractivist litigation. Ultimately, the aim is to anticipate the future of climate remedies and their effectiveness at the IACtHR based on present climate litigation in LAC.

中文翻译:

拉丁美洲和加勒比地区气候补救措施的政治生态:比较国家诉讼和美洲诉讼之间的合规性

气候危机将继续影响拉丁美洲和加勒比地区(LAC)的人类和自然系统。毫无疑问,这危及整个社区享有人权。在这种情况下,预计美洲人权体系(IAHRS)将做出回应,特别是因为其机构有权在确定存在侵犯权利的情况下对大多数拉丁美洲和加勒比地区国家下令采取补救措施。尽管该地区基于人权的国内气候案件越来越多,但国际人权协会机构尚未就涉及气候危机的案件做出裁决并下令采取补救措施。在此背景下,本文探讨如何从政治生态学角度理解气候补救措施,以捕捉拉美和加勒比地区气候诉讼的经验。此外,文章还提出了实施此类补救措施可能面临的挑战。为了回答这些问题,首先,它比较了国内法院在六起最终裁决的气候相关案件中的补救方法与美洲人权法院(IACTHR)在“反榨取主义”案件中的补救方法。其次,它运用政治生态学的视角来了解可能阻碍所确定补救措施实施的因素。文章认为,各国的社会经济成本在很大程度上决定了国内气候诉讼和 IACtHR 反榨取主义诉讼中的补救合规性。最终,目标是根据拉美和加勒比地区目前的气候诉讼,预测 IACtHR 气候补救措施的未来及其有效性。
更新日期:2024-01-18
down
wechat
bug