Securing Human Rights In The Face Of Climate Change - An Analysis

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Constitutional & Human Rights

Published: 2026-08-23T21:03:51.863297+00:00

Updated: 2026-08-26T17:06:22.186+00:00

SECURING HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE FACE OF CLIMATE

CHANGE: AN ANALYSIS

Dr. Sumanth H M, Associate Professor of Law, Government Law College, Ramanagara, Karnataka1

ABSTRACT

According to Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), everyone is entitled to life, liberty, and personal security. How to defend fundamental human rights when they are infringed upon by the consequences of climate change and natural catastrophes is the most challenging problem that governments are now confronting. Human rights breaches connected to migration and displacement brought on by climate change have not yet been recognized globally by a convention, and member nations do not agree on how to remedy these violations. All facets of life on Earth, including humans, plants, and animals, are being profoundly impacted by the severity of climate change. These impacts on the food we consume, the water we drink, the air we breathe, and the weather we experience endanger our health.

Current environmental catastrophes including drought, water shortages, and soil degradation might worsen due to climate change. Human rights rules must be followed to guarantee that people's rights to life, health, safety, and shelter are upheld when climate change forces them to travel across international boundaries. Keywords: climate change, human rights, international conventions, natural disaster, etc.

1 Associate Professor of Law, Government Law College, Ramanagara, Karnataka.

I. INTRODUCTION

Everyone, including migrants, is protected under the international human rights framework that nations have created. It is the duty of states to preserve, fulfill, safeguard, and promote every individual's legal rights. However, the framework's application to vulnerable migrants is frequently misunderstood. This commitment will be breached if proactive measures are not taken to prevent human rights breaches brought on by climate change, particularly the ongoing harms that are anticipated. According to the Fifth Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, emissions caused by humans are the main cause of climate change. Effective legal or other remedies should be available to victims of so-called climate disasters both now and in the future. States have an obligation to protect people' rights from harm caused by climate change and other environmental issues.

Some regions are more vulnerable than others, including Asia because of its dense population, Africa because of its susceptibility to river flooding and sea level rise, the Arctic and Africa because of their limited ability to adapt, and small islands because of their inhabitants' exposure to the effects of climate change and lack of infrastructure. The reality is that a host state is required to adhere to minimal standards of treatment of individuals as outlined by principles of human rights. According to human rights principles each displaced person has access to a remedy that respects, protects, and satisfies their lawful duties given under laws accepted internationally. The experiences of Kiribati,2 the Maldives, and Tuvalu3 are used by the researcher to provide real-world illustrations of the significance of protecting human rights.

The decline of livelihoods and the threats to the survival of certain low-lying Island governments, respectively, affect the rights to self-determination and sufficient housing. Furthermore, laws safeguarding the rights to food, health, and life, among other things, become even more important as climate change becomes more harmful. The human rights covenants protect all of these rights.

II. HUMAN RIGHTS APPROACH

The inherent worth and dignity of every human being are recognised in the U.N. Charter.4 The

2 McNamara, K. E., Cross-border migration with dignity in Kiribati(2015),Forced Migration Review

3 Apisai Ielemia, A treat to our Human Rights: Tuvalus Perspective on Climate Change,

(2007),https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/threat-our-human-rights-tuvalus-perspective-climate-change.

4 The UN Charter,adopted Oct.24,1945,

International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)5 also upholds this notion. Human rights address ongoing issues with ongoing proactive remedies and policies, while humanitarianism addresses transient issues with responsive solutions. No state or multilateral organisation can stop the impact of anthropogenic climate variations now that it has started. Therefore, climate change-related dislocation is a persistent problem that needs a persistent, long-lasting solution. There is general agreement among academics and intergovernmental organisations that climate change will make it extra problematic for people to exercise internationally recognised humanitarian rights like the right to food, shelter, and health. 6 Policymakers should focus on the unequal enjoyment of human rights in order to solve climate change-induced displacement. 7 III.

Use of Humanitarian Rights Framework for Climate Change

First of all, international law is a useful instrument for fostering responsibility for climate change as it impacts people, who are the focus of international law with a worldwide reach and demand an international response. Second, as climate change will result in violations of human rights, it makes sense to address climate change via the lens of human rights legislation. Thirdly, it makes practical sense that the law of human rights provides for tribunals that have a track record of striking a balance between the needs of people and the limited resources of the government. Fourth, there are existing means for enforcement and verification in the human rights framework. Fifth, humanitarian rights legislation may promote consistency in adaptation policy or international standards for adaptation activities at different levels.

5 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights .,adopted Dec.16,1966.

6 Stephen Humphreys, Introduction in Human Rights and Climate Change,Cambridge(2009),Cambridge

University Press.

7 Ibid

IV. The Effect of Climate Change on Human Rights

The implications of climate change have been specifically linked to the ―right to life, the right to health, the right to sufficient food and water, the right to adequate shelter, and the right to self-determinationǁ. Not all human rights will be affected equally by climate change; in particular, the rights of the underprivileged, politically marginalized communities and organisations, and future generations are at risk. Human rights abuses may result from how we respond to climatic change, thus a rights-based perspective may help us priorities among otherwise similar options. In the OHCHR study, the effects of climate change on the exercise of human rights are discussed in some detail, but the conclusion that it does not breach humanitarian rights legislation is reached with far less analysis.

In both instances, its results are consistent with the opinions of the governments who spoke to the OHCHR about the relationship amongst climatic change and humanitarian rights. Resolution 7/23 8invited governments to participate in the report's preparation and directed the OHCHR to do so "in consultation with and taking into account the views of States, international organizations and other stakeholders. " The subsequent information request from the OHCHR9 asked, among other things, for analyzing of the consequences of climatic change, including on humanitarian rights. It did not ask the receivers to take sides on whether or not climate change breaches human rights. States submitted thirty replies to the OHCHR. V. Right to healthy Environment

It is not a wonder that throughout the 1940s and 1960s period, when the UDHR (1948),10 ICCPR (1966),11 and ICESCR (1966)12 were all created, climate change was likely unheard of and environmental concerns (despite the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki) were also not particularly in the forefront. This is demonstrated by the fact that none of these three documents, recognized collectively as the Magna Carta of Humanitarian Rights,

8 Human Rights Resolution 7/23, https://ap.ohchr.org/documents/e/hrc/resolutions/a_hrc_res_7_23.pdf.

9 The

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights,1993(OHCHR) https://www.ohchr.org/en/about-us.

10 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted Dec.10, 1948.

11 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted Dec.16,1966.

12 The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted Dec.16,1966.

explicitly mentions or guarantees the right to a healthy environment. 13 The 1972 Stockholm Declaration, which is not legally enforceable, is the first time the human right to a healthy environment14 was acknowledged and expressed as a common 'conviction' of governments at the international level. According to certain interpretations, all other rights cannot be realized without the right to a healthy environment. Thus, the right to a healthy environment acts as a sort of invisible thread that ties the world's social, political, economic, and cultural structures together. However, it is now required to actively call attention to the value of the environment in order to get the attention of individuals, nation-states, and businesses due to factors such as overexploitation of the environment, pollution, and other environmental problems.

The fact that Rio Principle 115 was so widely and repeatedly accepted in 1992 shows that the humanitarian right to "a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature" has developed into a fundamental tenet of international customary law. 16 The right to have healthy environment is viewed as arising from or being read into additional rights, such as the right to life, in the current judicial discourse around the world. However, it might be contended that the right to the environment is equivalent to the "grandparent" right since, as the ICJ17 correctly stated, without it, even the right to life may be unattainable. The discussion of law may go forward like this.

Therefore, framing a primary right to the environment in the Asian region in connection with climate change displacement may be more acceptable to countries that do not interpret the right to life in an expansive manner as well as to those that do not even explicitly recognize the right to life and right to the environment in the first place. 13 Except in ICESCR‘s article 12(2)(b) where improvement of environmental (and industrial) hygiene is mentioned as part of right to health. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 (ICESCR) art 12(2)(b)ǁ.

14 ―Principle 1: ―Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life, in an environment of a quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being, and he bears a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generationsǁ Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (adopted 16 June 1972)ǁ. 15 Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature. 16 Lynda Collins, 'Are We There Yet? The Right to Environment in International and European Law' (2007) 3(2) McGill International Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy 119, 133.

17 International Court of Justice,1945,https://www.icj-cij.org/home

VI. Right to a healthy environment in International law

The author asserts that there is currently no clear international legal right to a healthy environment in spite of all of these developments in human rights. Furthermore, because nations would have to safeguard their population from environmental deterioration in order to maintain basic health standards, creating such a right could be difficult. The right to a healthy environment needs to be linked to another acknowledged right in order to be implemented. The difficulty in drawing this relationship is illustrated by the following human rights accords. (a) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights The 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)18 has been disputed. Right to life is highlighted in all the documents; however there are no articles about climate change in it.

However, Island governments may try to use a connection between a recognised right in this convention and climate change to make grievances to the Humanitarian Rights Committee. The Island nations might be entitled to file petitions under ICCPR Article 619 and 12, for example. Article 6 allows island states like Tuvalu and Kiribati to claim that the impacts of climatic change are disturbing their right to life. They may also claim that article 12 is being broken, which restricts their liberty to move and selection of residence. However, if there was an explicit healthy environment rights in the ICCPR,20 island nations would certainly have more legal success. These ideas are extremely valuable in advancing humanitarian rights in protecting climate refugees.

(b) International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights The International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 196621 states that the ICESCR22 uses the principle of progressive realisation, which acknowledges that it is the duty of the nations to take up actions that would completely implement the ICESCR rights. However, the rights to a healthy environment are not included in the ICESCR. The right to a healthy environment must be linked to another acknowledged right, such the right to health, in order to be respected. Island nations may take action to connect the right to health and the

18 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , adopted Dec.16,1966.

19 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , adopted Dec.16,1966.

20 Ibid

21 The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted Dec.16,1966

22 Ibid

right to a healthy environment. If island nations find it difficult to establish that relationship, it might be problematic. as no international human rights treaty mentions the right to a healthy environment.

VII. Conclusion

Environmental issues are not particularly covered by human rights legislation, and the current system of climate change treaties only addresses greenhouse gases (GHGs)23 in the atmosphere rather than the saving of refugees from climatic change. The current system of international law is unable to help Tuvalu and Kiribati effectively with their serious climate change-related survival issues is an acceptable fact. The lack of international support for the issue of climate change-induced migration is still the main reason why policymakers have not adopted a tangible solution to this problem. Since many of the countries affected by climate change are developing and underdeveloped, they lack the resources to handle the problem on their own without the full cooperation of the international community.

As noted in several works of literature, there are inconsistencies in the use of the word "erefugee" in relation to climate change. Given the unpredictability of the damage and the number of people displaced by climate change, as well as the lack of meaningful forecasts, the amount of money and humanitarian assistance that must be provided is incalculable. 23 ―Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are gases in the Earth's atmosphere that trap heat. They absorb infrared radiation emitted from the Earth's surface and reradiate it back to the surface. This creates a greenhouse effect that results in global warming and climate change, https://www. nationalgrid. com/stories/energy-explained/what-are greenhouse-gases.