Holcim climate lawsuit: Swiss court sets important precedent
Zug’s civil court admits lawsuit brought by Indonesian islanders
As we reported here in September, four residents of the Indonesian island of Pari who are severely affected by climate change, brought a climate lawsuit against Swiss cement producer Holcim in February 2023. They are seeking compensation for the damages they are suffering to the extent of Holcim’s responsibility and demand that the company reduce its future emissions to a climate-compatible level.
Holcim is the world’s largest cement company and responsible for 0.4% of global historical CO2 emissions. The Indonesian case is the first climate lawsuit against a Swiss corporation and a cement company.
Holcim requested that the civil court of Zug, where it is headquartered, dismiss the Indonesian lawsuit right away. The plaintiffs and the NGOs behind them, according to the court’s summary of Holcim’s position, are “ in reality not concerned with defending against a violation of personal rights, but rather with forcing a political decision on greenhouse gas emissions and/or climate protection measures. The civil courts lack jurisdiction in this matter.”
Yesterday, we learned that the court in Zug rejected Holcim’s claim in its entirety and ruled that the lawsuit should be admitted. It is worthwhile to quote some passages from the court’s 52-page decision verbatim:
“While climate change undoubtedly has a political dimension, as it affects a wide range of public interests beyond individual concerns,” the court states, “the private interests of the plaintiffs are not so overshadowed by the political scope of climate change that a civil court review would be precluded.”
“Even if the lawsuit affects the interests of third parties, for example, because they generally support a reduction in greenhouse gases or are affected to a similar extent as the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs’ own interest carries sufficient weight in this case to justify the litigation.”
An important clarification: “The fact that a company is not solely responsible for climate change and that the reduction of greenhouse gases by a single actor may not have an immediately noticeable impact on global climate consequences does not absolve the defendant (…) of its individual responsibility to contribute to combating climate change to the best of its ability.”
“Furthermore,” the court continued, “the defendant’s argument that other actors in the cement industry would emit more greenhouse gases in its place if obligated to reduce emissions is also unconvincing. If the lawsuit is successful, other CO2 emitters would likely also have to expect to be held accountable for their emissions.” (…) Moreover, harmful behavior is not legitimate simply because others behave in the same way.” Refreshing clarity from the Zug’s civil court!
The recent decision is an interim ruling. Holcim has already announced its intention to appeal the decision to the Zug High Court. If the High Court upholds the decision, the lawsuit from Indonesia will then receive a substantive trial.
Although the Zug decision represents only a successful first step, it has significant implications as a precedent. Sébastien Duyck, a Human Rights & Climate Campaign Manager at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) in Geneva, notes:
“By accepting the case as admissible, judges confirmed that the law applies to climate harms and rejected all arguments aimed at shielding major polluters from accountability. Building on recent case law, the decision confirms that the civil liability of major emitters can be engaged for climate harms they have knowingly contributed to. (...) The decision of the Swiss tribunal provides one additional precedent that will make it easier for other judges to hear such cases.”
“We are very pleased”, Ibu Asmania, one of the plaintiffs from Indonesia, said according to Swiss Interchurch Aid. “This decision gives us the strength to continue our fight.” With its important interim ruling, the court in Zug is indeed sending a very encouraging message at the end of the year.
(Image: Swiss Interchurch Aid)