Mock coffins fill a square in Milan in a protest over workplace safety in Italy

Fri, May 10, 2024 



MILAN (AP) — Mock coffins filled one of Milan’s most famous squares Friday in a protest organized by Italy's second-largest union to raise awareness over workplace deaths.

Protesters lined up 172 cardboard coffins in Piazza La Scala to symbolize the exact number of workers who died on the job last year in the northern Lombardy region alone.

The UIL labor union said that it was demanding that both the government and businesses do more to protect Italian workers.

“Today is a day of anger, of anguish, because behind every coffin that we have put out here there are first names and last names,” explained UIL union leader Enrico Vezza, noting that 41 workers have already lost their lives in Lombardy this year.

The union’s campaign is titled “Zero Deaths.” A sign at the center of the piazza showed the number of workers who have died in the workplace since 2018, with a peak of 1,709 in 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic sent deaths figures spiraling upwards in Italy.

Last year, 1,041 people died in the workplace in Italy.

According to European statistics agency Eurostat, Italy ranks eighth among European countries in fatalities at work, with an incidence of 2.66 per 100,000 employed, against the EU average of 1.76.

Friday’s protest comes amid a heated debate over workplace safety in Italy, following a series of fatalities across the country.

Earlier this month, five workers died at a sewage treatment plant near the southern city of Palermo, Sicily. In April, seven workers were killed in an explosion that collapsed several levels of an underground hydroelectric plant in northern Italy, while in mid-February five constructions workers died after a concrete beam collapsed at a supermarket building site in Florence.

The Associated Press

Exxon Pleads Not Guilty in Guyana to Misstating Equipment Value

Denis Chabrol
Fri, May 10, 2024



(Bloomberg) -- Exxon Mobil Corp. and one of its suppliers pleaded not guilty in a Guyana court Friday to charges related to overstating the value of oil-well equipment on a customs declaration by 200 times to about $12 billion.

The oil company’s local unit, Exxon Mobil Guyana Limited, is accused of making and subscribing to a false declaration. The supplier, Trinidad-based Ramps Logistics, is charged with making an untrue declaration. A magistrate adjourned the case until June 28.

Exxon and Ramps have said the issue stemmed from a clerical error by the contractor in late 2023 that denoted the value of equipment in US dollars instead of Guyanese dollars. A Guyana dollar is worth about one-half of a US cent.

In a statement, Exxon’s Guyana office said the mistake did not lead to any loss in revenue to the nation or its tax agency. The information on the customs declaration is not used to calculate any cost recovery or taxes, according to the statement. Exxon says it’s cooperating with the investigation and has provided the Guyana Revenue Authority with the corrected value.

“We are dedicated to ethical practices,” Exxon said in its statement. “Mistakes are promptly corrected when uncovered.”

The prosecutor in the case, Guyana Revenue Authority Deputy Commissioner Jason Moore, said the investigation is ongoing

©2024 Bloomberg L.P.

After layoffs, Musk says Tesla to spend $500 million on charging network

Reuters
Updated Fri, May 10, 2024 


(Reuters) -Tesla will spend more than $500 million this year to expand its fast-charging network, CEO Elon Musk said on Friday, days after abruptly laying off employees who were running the business.

"Just to reiterate: Tesla will spend well over $500M expanding our Supercharger network to create thousands of NEW chargers this year," Musk said in a post on his social media platform X.

"That's just on new sites and expansions, not counting operations costs, which are much higher," he said.

After the layoffs last week, Musk said Tesla planned to expand the Supercharger network but at a slower pace for new locations.


EV makers have been adopting Tesla's North American Charging Standard, making the company's superchargers closer to becoming the industry standard at the expense of the rival Combined Charging System.

However, Musk's decision to gut the electric-vehicle charging team is scrambling plans for rolling out new fast-charging stations and may delay President Joe Biden's efforts to electrify U.S. highways.

The Biden administration has doled out $5 billion to states over five years to build 500,000 EV chargers as part of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program, and Tesla has been among the biggest winners of those federal funds so far.

(Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Anil D'Silva and Arun Koyyur)

ALBERTA

Enbridge says carbon storage project still alive in spite of Capital Power decision


The Canadian Press
Fri, May 10, 2024 




CALGARY — Enbridge Inc.'s proposal to build a major carbon storage hub in Alberta remains on the table, the company said Friday, in spite of Capital Power's recent decision to shelve its own $2.4-billion project associated with the plan.

Enbridge executive vice-president Colin Gruending said the move by Capital Power to cancel a high-profile CCUS project proposed for its Genesee natural gas-fired power near Edmonton is "disappointing."

But he added another proposed carbon capture project in the area, at Heidelberg Materials' cement plant, remains in the works and keeps Enbridge's own proposed storage hub alive.

"That (Heidelberg) project has garnered some more financial support, and we'll be working with them to consider FID (final investment decision) later this year," Gruending said told a conference call with analysts to discuss the Enbridge's latest financial results.


"So the Wabamun Open Access Hub will generally continue."

CCUS — or carbon capture, utilization and storage — is a technology that traps harmful emissions from industrial processes and stores them deep underground to prevent them from entering the atmosphere.

Pipeline company Enbridge and electricity generator Capital Power agreed in 2021 to jointly evaluate CCUS solutions in Alberta. Capital Power had proposed to build a carbon capture facility at its Genesee plant, while Enbridge would build the storage hub.

But, Capital Power said last week that while it believes its Genesee carbon capture project is technically viable, it concluded the economics don't work.

Enbridge has already received permission from the government of Alberta to develop the underground hub, dubbed the Wabamun Open Access Hub.

The company's plan is for the hub to be scalable to meet the carbon storage needs of multiple industrial emitters in the area, making it potentially one of the largest underground CCUS hubs in the world.

The Heidelberg Materials CCUS project, which would connect to the Wabamun hub, is in the most advanced planning stages of any potential carbon capture project in the area.

It aims to capture one million tonnes of carbon emissions annually, making the Edmonton-area plant the world's first net-zero cement facility.

But Capital Power's project, which was to capture three million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, would have been a key part of Enbridge's plan.

Enbridge noted that Capital Power’s decision had no material impact to Enbridge's financial position or growth projections, nor was it characterized as a secured project.

Gruending said Enbridge remains strongly interested in growing a carbon capture, sequestration and transportation business.

But Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel said only the most competitive CCUS projects will go ahead, and tax incentives in the U.S. remain more attractive than what is on offer for carbon capture proponents in Canada.

"So we're real careful with how we deal with this," Ebel said.

"I think, that like a lot of other things, there'll probably be fewer of these (final projects) than obviously the number of proposals that are out there. We're going to do this really disciplined, and it sounds like they (Capital Power) are as well."

Capital Power's decision comes in spite of the fact the Alberta government is promising to cover up to 12 per cent of the costs of CCUS projects and the federal government as much as half through a new tax credit, which has yet to be legislated.

But many companies remain concerned that the existing federal carbon pricing system could be cancelled by future governments, a concern which would impact the financial feasibility of emissions-reducing investments like CCUS.

Ottawa is trying to address that uncertainty by offering so-called "carbon contracts for difference," which reduce the risk for businesses investing in clean technologies by guaranteeing the price of carbon for a fixed period of time.

But most companies proposing CCUS projects in Canada have not yet successfully negotiated a satisfactory contract for difference with the Canada Growth Fund.

Enbridge reported Friday its first-quarter profit fell compared with a year ago as it recorded a non-cash, net unrealized derivative fair value loss as well as costs related to job cuts announced in February.

On an adjusted basis, the company reported earnings of $2.0 billion or $0.92 per common share, an eight per cent increase from the previous year's quarter.

Analysts on average had expected a profit of 81 cents per share for the quarter, according to LSEG Data & Analytics.

In a note to clients, TD Cowen analyst Linda Ezergailis said Enbridge's strong results demonstrate the company is solidly positioned to deliver energy in a growing market.

"In our view, ENB's scale, diversification and stability, resilient business model, long-life assets, and ability to pivot to meet continued industry changes, including a transition to a lower-carbon future, should warrant a premium valuation," she said.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 10, 2024.

Amanda Stephenson, The Canadian Press

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for CCS 

ARGENTINA

YPF’s $2.5 Billion Shale Oil Pipeline Moves Ahead After Approval


Jonathan Gilbert
Fri, May 10, 2024 


(Bloomberg) -- Argentina’s biggest oil and gas producer, state-run YPF SA, is moving ahead with plans to build a $2.5 billion cross-country pipeline that’s key to unlocking exports of crude from the vast Vaca Muerta shale patch in Patagonia.

YPF recently received environmental authorization for the so-called Vaca Muerta Sur pipeline and is seeking bids from contractors to build it, said Max Westen, head of strategy and business development.

For years, YPF has spearheaded drilling in Vaca Muerta by teaming up with other oil companies. Now, it’s doing the same for building pipelines and a liquefied natural gas plant, both of which require partners to proceed.

“The environmental permit is a key milestone, and we are in discussions with the rest of the oil industry — there’s a lot of interest in participating,” Westen said on an earnings call.

Read More: YPF 1Q Net Income Beats Estimates

Pipeline capacity is the chief bottleneck holding back Vaca Muerta, a heralded but underdeveloped formation often likened to the Permian in the US.

Last year, the government built a new trunk line for shale gas that’s helping to reduce the country’s LNG imports. It’s also reversing the flow of a pipeline originally designed to bring in fuel from Bolivia, so that Argentina’s northern provinces can instead be supplied by domestic shale. The two projects may one day enable Argentina to send its gas to neighboring Brazil.

But shipments of crude are a quicker way to generate the billions of dollars a year that Argentina is seeking to help turn around its struggling economy.

That’s why drillers, including YPF, are shifting their attention to Vaca Muerta’s oil window. Already, the companies have resumed crude sales to neighboring Chile after a years-long hiatus.

They are also investing — via Oldelval SA — in expanding existing facilities to ship crude overseas from Argentina’s Atlantic coast. That route will soon have an extra 45,000 barrels a day of capacity, plus another 200,000 barrels next year, Westen said.

Vaca Muerta Sur will run from the shale heartland of Neuquen province across northern Patagonia to Punta Colorada, where a port must be built to load tankers. The conduit is expected to transport 180,000 barrels a day in 2026 and may eventually have capacity for 700,000 barrels.

“Vaca Muerta Sur is the most competitive evacuation route to monetize the crude in Vaca Muerta,” Westen said. “That’s why YPF is pursuing it as a priority over any other project.”

YPF’s net shale oil production in the first quarter hit a record of 112,000 barrels a day, an increase of 3% from the previous quarter.

YPF’s new management — appointed by President Javier Milei — is divesting aging, conventional oil fields to focus on Vaca Muerta in a bid to boost its stock price and resume dividend payments to shareholders.

The company pitched the blocks at an investor roadshow in Houston and Calgary last month, generating interest from about 70 companies, Westen said. YPF is preparing to receive bids in June and hopes to complete sales by the end of the year.

Business groups walk back claim on share of Canadians hit by capital gains changes

The Canadian Press
Thu, May 9, 2024 



OTTAWA — Prominent business groups have backtracked their claim that one in five Canadians would be affected by the federal government's proposed changes to capital gains taxation.

In a letter sent to Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland on Thursday, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and other groups said the government's assertion that only the wealthiest Canadians will be affected was misleading.

"In fact, one in five Canadians will be directly impacted over the next 10 years and the effects of this tax hike will be borne by all Canadians, directly or indirectly," the original letter reads.

But the study from which that figure was taken suggests otherwise.

The 2023 study by Simon Fraser University's Jonathan Rhys Kesselman estimates one in five Canadians would be affected over a 10-year period if the inclusion rate was increased on all capital gains.

The federal budget only increases the inclusion rate on individuals' capital gains above $250,000, which means a much smaller proportion of Canadians would end up paying higher taxes.

The new inclusion rate would also apply to all capital gains realized by corporations.

After The Canadian Press asked questions about the figure, the chamber of commerce changed the letter on its website to read that one in five companies would be directly affected.

"We looked into this, and upon review, the language could be more clear to reflect the impact on Canadian companies. We have adjusted the copy in the letter online," spokesman Karl Oczkowski said in an email.

The chamber of commerce did not immediately clarify how it arrived at the conclusion that one in five companies would be hit.

The joint letter is signed by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Canadian Federation for Independent Business, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, Canadian Venture Capital and Private Equity Association, Canadian Franchise Association and Canadian Canola Growers Association.

The groups call on the Liberal government to scrap the tax increase, arguing it will ultimately hurt the economy by lessening competition and innovation.

Kesselman, who was a professor at SFU's School of Public Policy, died earlier this year.

In his study, Kesselman assessed arguments for and against increasing the inclusion rate, including its potential impact on the economy.

"The overall impact of existing and increased capital gains taxes on the economy's efficiency and growth are mixed and not easily quantified," Kesselman wrote.

"However, contrary to common claims, some of these impacts would be economically favourable, while others that might be economically adverse could be mitigated through appropriate concomitant reforms."

His study recommended increasing the capital gains inclusion rate above a certain threshold of capital gains or income, so that it would better target a smaller group of individuals with the highest and most recurrent capital gains.

The federal budget proposes making two-thirds of capital gains — the profit made on the sale of assets — taxable, rather than one-half.

For individuals' capital gains of $250,000 or less, the inclusion rate would remain the same, at 50 per cent.

Ottawa estimates that in any given year, 0.13 per cent of Canadians would pay higher taxes on their capital gains.

Meanwhile, it says only a small share of corporations will be affected, noting in the budget that 12.6 per cent of corporations had capital gains in 2022.

The budget also proposes an incentive for entrepreneurs by reducing the inclusion rate to 33.3 per cent on a lifetime maximum of $2 million in eligible capital gains.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government has faced backlash from several groups over the tax changes, including from the Canadian Medical Association.

The physicians' group has pointed out that doctors with incorporated medical practices will be particularly affected, because all of their investments are made inside a corporation.

However, Freeland and Trudeau have dismissed the pushback, arguing it's high time for wealthier Canadians to pay their fair share in taxes.

They've also argued the government needs that tax revenue to help pay for things like housing and health care, and deliver "generational fairness" for younger Canadians.

The Liberal government estimates the higher inclusion rate will generate $19.4 billion over the next five years.

The proposed capital gains tax change is expected to come into effect on June 25.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 9, 2024.

Nojoud Al Mallees, The Canadian Press

South Africa asks World Court to order Israel's withdrawal from Rafah

Reuters
Updated Fri, May 10, 2024

Palestinians evacuate after Israeli forces launched a ground and air operation in the eastern part of Rafah


AMSTERDAM (Reuters) -South Africa has asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to order Israel to withdraw from Rafah as part of additional emergency measures over the war in Gaza, the U.N.'s top court said on Friday.

In the ongoing case brought by South Africa, which accuses Israel of acts of genocide against Palestinians, the World Court in January ordered Israel to refrain from any acts that could fall under the Genocide Convention and to ensure its troops commit no genocidal acts against Palestinians.

Israel did not immediately respond to requests for comment. It has previously said it is acting in accordance with international law in Gaza, and has called South Africa's genocide case baseless and accused Pretoria of acting as "the legal arm of Hamas".


In filings published on Friday, South Africa is seeking additional emergency measures in light of the ongoing military action in Rafah, which it calls the "last refuge" for Palestinians in Gaza.

South Africa asked the court to order that Israel cease the Rafah offensive and allow unimpeded access to Gaza for U.N. officials, organisations providing humanitarian aid, and journalists and investigators.

According to South Africa, Israel's military operation is killing the Palestinians of Gaza while at the same time starving them by denying humanitarian aid to enter.

"Those who have survived so far are facing imminent death now, and an order from the Court is needed to ensure their survival," South Africa's filing said.

The war has killed nearly 35,000 people in Hamas-run Gaza, according to health authorities there. About 1,200 people were killed in Israel and 253 taken hostage on Oct. 7 when Hamas launched the attack that started the war, according Israeli tallies.

The ICJ, also known as the World Court, generally rules within a few weeks on requests for emergency measures. It will likely take years before the court will rule on the merits of the case. While the ICJ's rulings are binding and without appeal the court has no way to enforce them.

(Reporting by Bart Meijer and Stephanie van den Berg; Editing by Kirsten Donovan and Jonathan Oatis)

UK Government admits it could be breaking law if it ignores Strasbourg judges, Rwanda documents reveal

Charles Hymas
Sat, May 11, 2024 

Rishi Sunak's controversial Safety of Rwanda Act aims to facilitate the removal of many who have arrived on boats - Chris J Ratcliffe/REUTERS


The Government has admitted that removing asylum seekers to Rwanda could put the UK in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

The admission that the UK could be in breach of international law has come in submissions in response to a legal challenge by the FDA union, which represents top civil servants.

Ministers have previously maintained that they would not be breaking international law if they were to ignore rule 39 orders issued by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), one of which blocked the first flight to Rwanda in June 2022.

This is because they have enshrined the power for ministers to ignore rule 39 orders in legislation through Rishi Sunak’s controversial Safety of Rwanda Act.

Civil servants have been instructed in guidance that they should obey ministers but the FDA is challenging this because it claims this would be a breach of the Civil Service code which requires officials to act in accordance with international law.

In a submission to the court, the Government has admitted that failure to comply with a rule 39 injunction could breach article 34 of the ECHR.

Rishi Sunak aims to get the first flights off to Rwanda as early as June 24 - TOBY MELVILLE/AFP

This allows individual applications to the ECtHR by people who allege there have been violations of their human rights.

Article 34 says that high contracting parties – which means states, including the United Kingdom – “undertake not to hinder in any way the effective exercise of this right”.

Whether it is a potential breach of international law – and so places civil servants in breach of the civil service code – will be determined by the High Court at a hearing of the FDA’s challenge at the beginning of next month.

If the union is successful with its legal challenge, it could see the Government ordered to remove the conflict between civil servants’ duty under the Civil Service Code and the potential breach of international law.

This could require the Government to hold a parliamentary vote to either specify in law that the UK will ignore the injunctions – rather than simply giving ministers the power to do so – or to amend the Civil Service Code to remove officials’ obligations to comply with the law.
Fresh divisions

Such votes could open up fresh divisions between Tory moderates, who believe it would be a step too far to enshrine a requirement to breach international law legislation, and Right-wing MPs, who would back a strengthening of the legislation.

This could lead to further delays in Rishi Sunak’s ambition to get the first flights off to Rwanda as early as June 24. He has made clear that he will not allow a foreign court to block the Rwanda scheme.

The case is being heard by Mr Justice Martin Chamberlain who disclosed the Government’s admission after receiving a letter from the Government’s lawyers setting out ministers’ position.

The lawyers argued that the FDA claim was “hypothetical” on the basis that any migrants appealing their deportation would have to exhaust all avenues in UK domestic courts before submitting any claim to Strasbourg judges.
Reforms

Ministers believe that reforms of the rule 39 process after lobbying the court will make it harder for Strasbourg to injunct the flights for a second time. The threshold for an injunction to be granted has been raised.

However, Mr Justice Chamberlain said the Government lawyers had acknowledged the issue raised by the FDA would crystallise if an injunction was issued and “a ministerial decision is taken not to comply with that measure in circumstances where that constitutes a breach of article 34 of the ECHR”.

Legal experts say it is not clear whether the Government is accepting that all – or just some – decisions not to comply with interim measures would breach article 34.

In summing up the case, Mr Justice Chamberlain indicated that the prospect of a rule 39 order being issued was not hypothetical.
Rwanda removals

The Judge said: “It would not be right to say anything about the merits of the claim at this stage. However, it appears from the claim that some civil servants believe (or have been advised) that it would be contrary to their terms and conditions to comply with a ministerial decision to proceed with Rwanda removals in the face of a rule 39 measure.

“The prospect that they will be asked to act contrary to a rule 39 measure, whilst far from certain, is also not hypothetical, given the Government’s public statements on this subject.

“That being so, there is a powerful public interest in the determination of this claim in advance of the point when any rule 39 measure might be indicated.”

Is it 'high time' for Europe to recognise the human right to a healthy environment?

Rosie Frost
Fri, May 10, 2024 

Is it 'high time' for Europe to recognise the human right to a healthy environment?


Last month, Switzerland became the first country in the world to be sentenced by an international court over climate inaction.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) backed a group of older Swiss women concerned about the impact of climate change on their health. It ruled that the government’s lack of action had violated their fundamental human rights.

The landmark ruling could have major implications for international environmental law, sparking numerous questions about the intersection between climate change and human rights.

The ECHR’s climate decision is a warning to governments the world over


Former UN rights chief says ECHR decision shows that safe climate is a human right


And, in the wake of the unprecedented verdict, calls to enshrine the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment in the European Convention on Human Rights have once again been rekindled.
What is the right to a healthy environment?

The verdict in the Swiss women’s case does set a precedent for future climate litigation but, because the European human rights system doesn’t recognise the right to a healthy environment, it didn’t specifically address this.

Human rights come with legally enforceable obligations for states and enshrining them within international law provides legal avenues for holding governments accountable if they don’t uphold them.

Swiss members of Senior Women for Climate gather after the European Court of Human Rights' ruling. - AP Photo/Jean-Francois Badias

“The right to a healthy environment is crucial to preventing and remediating the impacts of the escalating triple planetary crisis (climate change, biodiversity loss, and pervasive pollution) which affects the lives and rights of individuals and communities worldwide,” says Nikki Reisch, Director of the Climate and Energy Program at the Centre for International Environmental Law (CIEL).

It provides comprehensive protection against a range of environmental harms, she explains. That includes ensuring every individual has the right to clean air and water, a safe climate, healthy ecosystems, healthy and sustainably produced food as well as non-toxic living, working and learning environments.

In addition, it guarantees some other procedural elements like access to environmental education and justice with effective remedies as well as public participation in decision-making.

Crucially it also reinforces protection for environmental defenders whose human rights are often “trampled” during their work.
Where is the right to a healthy environment already recognised?

After the UN Human Rights Council’s recognition of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment in 2021, the UN General Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution in 2022 recognising that a safe and liveable environment is not just “sound policy” but a fundamental, universal human right.

Not every member state adopted this right into its domestic laws or constitution and the resolution is not legally binding.

The right to a healthy environment, however, is recognised in domestic law in 80 per cent of UN member states - 161 out of 193 nations. The UK and Russia are among some notable exceptions.

‘Historic’ European Court of Human Rights ruling backs Swiss women in climate change case


What does the ECHR’s landmark ruling mean for human rights and climate change?

“The implementation of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment has prompted stronger environmental legislation, enhanced public involvement in governance, greater transparency, and equitable access to justice,” says Reisch.

“These advancements have fostered better environmental outcomes, including cleaner air, safer drinking water, and reduced emissions.”

The Council of Europe remains the only regional human rights system that has not yet explicitly recognised the right to a healthy environment.

Outside of individual countries, internationally there are three regional systems for the protection of human rights: the African, the Inter-American and the European systems.

“The Council of Europe remains the only regional human rights system that has not yet explicitly recognised the right to a healthy environment,” Reisch explains.
Will the Council of Europe recognise the right to a healthy environment?

The Council of Europe has been facing demands to recognise the right to a healthy environment for more than 50 years.

Just this month, more than 400 civil society organisations from Amnesty International to Greenpeace, CIEL and Human Rights Watch came together to call for the right to a healthy environment to be put into law.

“The scale of the harms for people living in Europe, and the importance of coming to a unified approach in interpreting and implementing the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment makes it imperative for the Council of Europe to urgently take decisive steps toward the adoption of a binding legal framework that recognises and protects the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment,” they wrote in a letter to member states’ Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Permanent Representatives.

All Council of Europe states also voted in favour of the UN resolution recognising this right in 2022.

Activists protest against the use of fossil fuels and climate justice at COP28 in December. - AP Photo/Kamran Jebreili

A turning point came at the Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe in 2023. All member states present emphasised the need to strengthen their work on “human rights aspects of the environment based on the political recognition of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as a human right”.

Progress is now being made but, as former UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights David Boyd noted, “it will take a unified effort from civil society and other actors to push the European States to adopt a new protocol recognising the right to a healthy environment.”

Action is overdue and the only obstacle is a lack of political will.

42 of the Council’s 46 member states already protect the right to a healthy environment through their national constitutions, legislation or as signatories to the Aarhus Convention. This international agreement guarantees the public three key rights on environmental issues: access to information, public participation and access to justice.

Reisch argues that recent significant climate cases show it is “high time” for the Council of Europe to “catch up” with other regional human rights institutions by putting the right to a healthy environment in law.

“Action is overdue and the only obstacle is a lack of political will,” she adds.
What would the right to a healthy environment mean for climate cases?

“Guaranteeing effective protection of the right to a healthy environment is critical to driving more rigorous environmental policies, more ambitious climate action, and more consistent legal enforcement across the continent,” Reisch explains.

Instilling this right could also help with future climate litigation. It has formed the basis for an increasingly large number of cases, particularly in Latin America and has also been used effectively in domestic and regional courts in Africa.

More than 30% of world’s electricity now comes from renewables, report reveals


Fossil fuels generated less than a quarter of the EU's electricity in April

“The historic recognition of this right by the UN General Assembly and UN Human Rights Council is already informing legal precedents and advancing accountability around the globe.”

Several international courts are now being asked to address questions about a state’s international obligations in the face of the climate emergency - including the legal consequences of failing to fulfil these obligations. The right to a healthy environment is helping to answer those questions.

Beyond that, Reisch says more effective protection of the right and enforcement of corresponding obligations could help avoid the need for litigation in the first place.

CANADA
Court rules use of Emergencies Act against convoy protests were heavy handed, gov’t plans to appeal

Local Journalism Initiative
Fri, May 10, 2024 

OTTAWA — January 23, 2024 A federal judge has deemed the government's application of the Emergencies Act to disperse convoy protests in early 2022 as excessive, citing an infringement on protesters' Charter rights. Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley expressed that, while the protests revealed an unacceptable breakdown of public order, the government's use of the Emergencies Act lacked the qualities of reasonableness, such as justification, transparency, and intelligibility. Mosley emphasized that there was no national emergency justifying the act's invocation.

The case, argued by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Constitution Foundation, and individuals with frozen bank accounts, contended that Ottawa did not meet the legal threshold for employing the unprecedented legislation. The government intends to appeal the decision.

The Emergencies Act was invoked by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government on February 14, 2022, in response to prolonged protests in Ottawa and blockades at border points. The act granted law enforcement significant powers to remove and arrest protesters, freeze finances, and commandeer tow trucks. Mosley's ruling scrutinized the economic orders, stating they infringed on protesters' freedom of expression and violated Charter rights by allowing unreasonable search and seizure of financial information.

The judge acknowledged the potential for serious violence but asserted that it did not meet the Act's requirements, particularly as the situation at Coutts had been resolved without violence. The government argued that the measures were targeted, proportional, and temporary, emphasizing the threat to national security.

Holden Rhodes who owns the Killarney Mountain Lodge and Manitoulin Brewing Company donated $25,000 to the protest against the COVID-19 vaccine measures despite having received government subsidies for his businesses. He spoke with The Expositor about Justice Mosley’s decision saying: “I think Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley considered the evidence before him and provided a well reasoned decision concluding, among other items, that there was no national emergency and that the federal government's decision to declare one was unreasonable and a violation of the Emergencies Act. The Emergencies Act was renamed in 1988, replacing much of what was previously known as the War Measures Act. The Emergencies Act is an act of last resort and, prior to February 14, 2022, had not been invoked since its enactment in 1988. Before that, the War Measures Act was only invoked three times since its enactment in 1914 being; the First World War, the Second World War and the October 1970 FLQ crisis.’

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre swiftly criticized both the government and Prime Minister Trudeau personally, asserting, "He instigated the crisis by fostering division." Poilievre expressed on social media platform X, "He then violated Charter rights to suppress citizens illegally. As Prime Minister, I pledge to unify our country for the cause of freedom."

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh reluctantly acknowledged his party's support for the Emergencies Act's invocation, attributing the crisis to a direct failure of Justin Trudeau's leadership and the inaction of other levels of government. Speaking at a caucus meeting in Edmonton, Singh stated that his party will closely monitor the appeal proceedings.

Mr. Rhodes went on to say that he thinks “the seriousness of this legislation being one of absolute last resort; the rarity of the Emergencies Act being invoked (two world wars and then by a father (1970) and son (2022)); it was revoked by the federal government 9 days after it was invoked (Feb 14-23, 2022) as there wasn't support for it in the Senate; and the overwhelmingly peaceful behaviour of the protesters involved in an isolated geographic area where protests typically occur.”

Despite the government's claim of necessity, Mosley's decision sets a precedent, emphasizing that emergency powers should be used sparingly and carefully. The government's plan to appeal sets the stage for a potential legal battle, possibly reaching the Supreme Court of Canada. The decision contrasts with the Rouleau commission's findings, which concluded that the Emergencies Act was appropriately invoked, citing a failure in policing and federalism during the protests.

Jacqueline St. Pierre, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, The Manitoulin Expositor