abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Diese Seite ist nicht auf Deutsch verfügbar und wird angezeigt auf English


30 Sep 2019

Dana Drugmand, Climate Liability News

Norway: UN rapporteur on human rights and environment calls on Govt. to cease oil exploration to fight climate change

Alle Tags anzeigen

"Norway Must Curtail Oil Production to Fight Climate Change, UN Expert Says", 25 Sep 2019

Ahead of a November court hearing in a lawsuit challenging the Norwegian government’s approval of offshore oil drilling, a UN human rights official is calling on Norway to cease new oil exploration and to “accept substantial responsibility” for addressing the climate crisis...

Boyd’s statement followed a 12-day visit to Norway to assess the country’s progress in safeguarding human rights and the environment...

The Norwegian government is being sued by environmental groups Greenpeace and Nature and Youth, which argue that the country’s new petroleum drilling licenses contradict Norway’s commitment to the Paris Agreement and violates Article 112 of the Norwegian constitution that guarantees the right to a healthy environment. The Oslo District Court recognized this constitutional right while concluding that offshore oil licensing does not violate this right. The environmental groups appealed the decision and that appeal will be heard Nov. 5-14 in the Borgarting Court of Appeal.

Boyd referenced the lawsuit in his statement and is urging the Norwegian government to accept the district court’s interpretation of Article 112 as a “clear expression of the human right to live in a healthy environment,” rather than an abstract principle...