A Dutch court ruled on Wednesday that the Netherlands violated the human rights of residents of the tiny Caribbean island of Bonaire, a Dutch territory, by failing to protect them from the effects of climate change.
The Hague District Court ordered the national government to set binding targets for reductions of greenhouse gas emissions within 18 months and to draft a detailed adaptation plan for Bonaire to be implemented within four years. The court found that the government had discriminated against the approximately 26,000 residents of Bonaire by failing to come up with such a plan, despite the well-known dangers of global warming.
Legal experts said the ruling added to a growing body of law about the obligations of countries to citizens in the era of climate change, and could prompt new lines argument in courts around the world.
“The ruling, based on discrimination against the inhabitants of Bonaire, is significant, and will surely open doors for a host of comparable cases around the world,” said Vesselina Newman, a lawyer for ClientEarth, a nonprofit legal group. She said that was particularly true for countries with overseas territories.
In a statement accompanying Wednesday’s decision, the court said, “There is no good reason why measures for the inhabitants of Bonaire, who will be affected by climate change sooner and more severely, should be taken later and less systematically than for the inhabitants of the European part of the Netherlands.”
The case was brought by eight residents of Bonaire and Greenpeace Netherlands. They argued that Bonaire, one of several Dutch territories in the Caribbean, faced imminent danger from projected sea level rise, higher temperatures, storms and flooding. Marieke Vellekoop, director of Greenpeace Netherlands, called the decision a “historic victory.”
The office of Sophie Hermans, a deputy prime minister and also minister of climate policy and green growth, said the government was still reviewing the ruling.
Maria Antonia Tigre, director of global climate change litigation at the Sabin Center at Columbia University, said that the decision would have particular resonance in Caribbean and Pacific islands, areas that were once colonized and are now highly vulnerable to rising seas. She said the ruling was also particularly strong in its focus on adaptation measures, which have not been the subject of as many legal cases as reducing emissions.
What is emerging now, Ms. Tigre said, is a consistency in recent court rulings that are building on each other.
Wednesday’s ruling said the government had violated the European Convention on Human Rights, a 1950 treaty that now includes a framework for assessing climate-related legal claims. That was also key in a case brought by a group called KlimaSeniorinnen, or Senior Women for Climate Protection, in Switzerland. In 2024, Europe’s top human rights court found that the Swiss government had not done enough to protect its citizens.
In another landmark case cited in the ruling, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion in July saying that states must act to protect people from the “urgent and existential threat” of climate change.
Legal experts said they had expected that opinion to jump-start more climate lawsuits. After the decision on Bonaire, environmental groups may decide to be more ambitious. “I think there’s a very clear state responsibility now,” Ms. Tigre said.
Climate change threatens Bonaire’s mangrove forests, salt pans and coral reefs, which attract visitors from around the world. The court decision said warming could harm the tourism-based economy and noted that many poorer residents are ill-equipped to protect themselves from extreme weather.
“Climate change is a complex global problem that poses a serious threat to people, without it being clear who exactly is causing what damage,” the decision said. “This lack of certainty, however, does not allow countries to point fingers at each other while failing to take sufficient measures themselves.”
The court said the Netherlands was not complying with international accords, such as the 2015 Paris Agreement, in which most countries in the world vowed to cut emissions.
The District Court of The Hague has previously issued at least two critical climate decisions. In 2015, it ordered the Dutch government to toughen its climate policies in a case brought by the environmental group Urgenda. In 2021, it ruled that the oil company Shell must sharply reduce its emissions, though the decision was overturned three years later. An appeal is pending.
Angelo Vrolijk, a correction officer, was one of the residents who brought the Bonaire case. He wanted to protect the island for future generations, and was gratified that the ruling included a short timeline for officials to implement their plans. “The train is moving now,” he said.
Karen Zraick covers legal affairs for the Climate desk and the courtroom clashes playing out over climate and environmental policy.
The post Court Orders the Netherlands to Protect a Caribbean Island From Climate Change appeared first on New York Times.
