In 2021, the CRC dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, stating that the plaintiffs had not sufficiently demonstrated that they had exhausted all domestic remedies before bringing their complaint to the international level. However, the committee acknowledged the gravity of the climate crisis and recognized that states have a duty to protect children from foreseeable harm, including that resulting from climate change. Moreover, despite the unfavorable outcome, the reasoning in the case is highly relevant to future climate human rights litigants.
Key takeaways from the case include: First, the CRC groundbreakingly established that states have extraterritorial jurisdiction over children who suffer harm due to climate change. The CRC considered that states have effective control over the sources of emissions contributing to reasonably foreseeable significant harm to children outside their territory. In other words, the states’ failure to control emissions led to the violation of children’s human rights, a failure that was both within the states’ control and reasonably foreseeable. This model of extraterritorial jurisdiction is crucial for making climate litigation viable, given the unique characteristics of climate change, which often transcend national borders and involve diffuse sources of harm, complicating litigation efforts.
Second, the fact that the decision came from an international body is in itself significant. While most climate litigation cases have been brought in national courts, primarily in the United States and Europe, only a very small number have been filed before international bodies. This international ruling sets an important precedent on a global scale, and even though the case was dismissed due to lack of exhaustion of domestic remedies, it highlighted a key procedural barrier in international climate litigation. This underscored the importance of establishing clear and accessible legal pathways for individuals and groups to seek redress for climate change-related harm.
Overall, the Sacchi case helped raise global awareness about the impact of climate change on future generations, highlighting the evolving field of climate justice and the interconnectedness of climate change and human rights. It also empowered young activists by demonstrating their ability to engage in international legal processes and advocate for stronger climate action, emphasizing their role in driving global change.