 |
| Yoon Hyun-jeong, left, one of 19 plaintiffs from Youth 4 Climate Action, an environmental civic group that sued the government in March 2020 for having neglected to prevent climate change from threatening the future of the country's youths, and Youn Se-jong from Solutions for Our Climate, who legally represents the youth group / Korea Times photo by Shim Hyun-chul |
Youth 4 Climate Action's legal challenge at Constitutional Court marks Asia's 1st
By Ko Dong-hwan
After leaving her parents and three younger siblings in Ulsan to join Youth 4 Climate Action's fight against the government, Yoon Hyun-jeong goes to the environmentalist group's office near Gwanghwamun Palace in Seoul's Jongno District every weekday and sometimes even on weekends.
Having dropped out of her first year of high school and moved in with her grandfather in Seoul recently, Yoon, 17, can now focus on preparing for the group's next showdown with the government at the Constitutional Court which could be a public hearing.
At their headquarters, Yoon and 18 other members of the group who together sued the government in March 2020 have been discussing their demands, studying how grim their future would be under the impact of climate change, and communicating with their two legal representatives, Solutions for Our Climate (SFOC) and S&L Partners, to prepare for the hearing. The law offices offered to help the teenage litigators pro bono in their case at the Constitutional Court.
"We talk about what messages we should deliver to media outlets, what to write in our newsletters and, when our lawyers tell us about a plan for the hearing, we discuss what to say publicly based on that," Yoon told The Korea Times. She and her fellow litigators are part of 150 members of the global movement group's Korean arm founded in 2019. Ninety percent of them are teenagers from 40 schools nationwide and the rest are adults.
The youth movement naturally attracted the attention of adults who speak to her in undermining or patronizing ways, saying things like "we are sorry about the mess you are dealing with," or "you don't know what you are doing."
"I get upset because they want to be bystanders, step back and cheer us on, but they are the ones who have the power to make changes and do something about our doomed future, not us," said Yoon, who started hitting the streets with signs under the fear of climate change as a middle school student in Ulsan. When she ditched school in 2019 to join a Friday for Future parade in Seoul ― an international climate movement instigated by Swedish youth environmentalist Greta Thunberg ― teachers tried to dissuade her but the school principal had to give in to the girl's unwavering passion.
"I will pursue university later but also continue with my climate activities," said Yoon, who started studying by herself with online videos instead of classroom education ― a sacrifice she made for the sake of the campaign.
 |
| Yoon Hyun-jeong began raising awareness on climate change with one-person protests in front of her middle school in Ulsan, her hometown in South Gyeongsang Province, using signs she made, including the ones shown above. The sign on the left, with a photo of Yoon and her younger siblings playing on the beach, reads "Protect Four Siblings' Safe Future." The other reads "Everyone's rights, Youth 4 Climate Action." Korea Times photo by Shim Hyun-chul |
Long shot but winnable
SFOC's Youn Se-jong, who represents the 19 teenagers in this court battle after nine years working as an attorney at law, is certain they can win. It's scientifically undeniable that climate change's impact will only worsen if human efforts to counter it don't get any better. It's also unarguable that the government's efforts so far aren't enough to turn things around with guaranteed safety and future security for the country. With these two facts, the 38-year-old lawyer said the court has "logically and legalistically substantiate grounds to rule the government has violated the plaintiffs' basic rights." He has assured his young clients they can win.
"The government already announced late last year it will neutralize carbon emissions by 2050," Youn told The Korea Times. "That means the country wants to limit global warming to below 1.5 degree Celsius by the end of this century. So they know the danger of not reaching that goal, and it's no longer acceptable that what the government has been doing for its citizens since signing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992 was enough to protect the people's basic rights."
Many environmental groups and individuals worldwide have already launched legal battles against governments under similar accusations. Among such cases, however, what happened in the Netherlands, Ireland and France are considered the most significant because their governments lost ― in the Netherlands and Ireland, they lost at their supreme courts in 2019 and 2020, respectively, while the French government lost in an administrative court in February 2021.
But compared to those European countries, Korea is a little different. While Europe started enforcing eco-friendly regulations throughout industrial sectors well ahead of Asian countries, Korea is one of the Asian countries that insists on maintaining rapid economic growth and is thus responsible for an enormous share of global greenhouse gases. No other countries in Asia have seen a legal dispute against their government's lack of environmental responsibility that went as far as the Constitutional Court.
Given those underlying facts, the impact from the legal fight between Youth 4 Climate Action and the Korean government ― if it's ruled in favor of the youths ― is expected to cast a huge influence on future environmental movements in Japan, China and Southeast Asia.
 |
| Members of the Affaire du Siecle (Case of the Century) team, consisting of members of the Nicolas Hulot Foundation, Greenpeace France, Oxfam and Notre Affaire a Tous, celebrate the historic judgment at the Paris Administrative Court on Feb. 3, 2021, which acknowledged the French state's responsibility in the climate crisis. The court recognized that it was illegal for the state not to respect its commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The court also stated that the government is accountable for environmental damage, charging the authority with "ecological prejudice." Courtesy of Greenpeace |
"The Korean judiciary has a pretty settled legalistic, rule-of-law system compared to other Asian countries, and many states worldwide don't even have Constitutional Courts," Youn said. "If we win, it will become an exemplar case as a wake-up call for other nations' governments."
The Constitutional Court's ruling, Youn anticipates, will have direct leverage on South Korean businesses and industrial sectors. With the central government ruled delinquent for not having put enough eco-friendly regulations into practice, the government and lawmakers at the National Assembly will be required to come up with a stronger blueprint that will enable carbon neutralization by 2050. Whatever comes from those adjustments, potentially more rigorous measures on sectors ranging from transportation to steelmaking and coal-fired power plants, will be nothing short of mandatory for local industry.
"Without those measures reducing greenhouse gases and other carbon footprints, our country's businesses will actually lose their edge in the global competition because many global enterprises have begun seriously taking into account the environment in their productive pipelines," Youn said. "So, if the youths win in court, it will be a good result for our country and companies rather than a burden to them. And the decision must come before the Moon Jae-in administration's rule ends in May 2022 so the President's initiative ― neutralizing carbon emissions by 2050 ― can take leverage effect from the court's ruling."
Youth rights
Seven months after Youth 4 Climate Action brought the government to the Constitutional Court in March 2020, the government responded with a rebuttal. It denied the youths' claims, saying the government didn't violate their right to life and a healthy environment; youths aren't the sole victims of climate change's impact ― everyone is regardless of age; and the government had done all it could to protect the youths' basic rights.
The youth group then filed their rebuttal against the government in January. They requested a public hearing last year, which has yet to be approved.
 |
| The Constitutional Court in Seoul's Jongno District is where the showdown between 19 teenage plaintiffs from Youth 4 Climate Action and the government, the defendant, is unfolding. The court is looking to hold a public hearing as was requested by the youth group in 2020. Korea Times file |
While waiting to see how her group's legal battle would develop, Yoon has been frequently asked by adults whether she fights because she cares about the Earth getting sick or because of her environmental sensitivity.
"I fight for my rights, and so do some of the other activists," she said. "I want to inform the public through the course of time that climate change isn't simply about Earth's ecological problems. It's more importantly about violation of people's rights, especially youths. Besides, we don't have suffrage and official channels to participate in any political decisions so there isn't any way to make our voices heard in this country except through the Constitutional Court."
Some of the points made in the government's rebuttal, according to Youn, had scientific flaws in understanding climate change's impact on people ― like when the government said climate change isn't "part of national issues that wield direct influence on people's right to life like the death penalty or euthanasia."
"One's right to life can be violated when their life becomes threatened by increased dangers within the ambient environment like the risks of natural disasters. It's not restricted to when people are at any life-threatening moment," Youn said. "International interpretation on human rights by legal experts also considers climate change the biggest threat to the individual's dignity, life and health."
The other erroneous point Youn said the government rebutted was that climate change's impact "threatens not just youths but equally all citizens."
"Young generations have longer lives ahead of them than older generations so once climate change keeps disrupting the Earth's ecological lifeline, youths will face a harsher reality for a longer period," Youn said. "Grown-ups can enjoy the rest of their lives, while leaving the responsibility to future generations."
