A Landmark Legal Victory for Climate Activists in Scotland
For years, climate activists across Europe have vehemently protested the proposed development of two new oil and gas fields in Scotland, Cambo and Rosebank. These projects, championed by fossil fuel giants like Shell and Equinor, have ignited a firestorm of controversy due to their potential to exacerbate the climate crisis. Activists have employed a range of tactics, from large-scale demonstrations and petition drives to acts of civil disobedience, to raise awareness and pressure the government to halt the developments. Their central argument revolves around the incompatibility of new fossil fuel projects with the UK’s legally binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and achieve net-zero targets.
In a significant legal victory for climate campaigners, the UK High Court ruled in December 2023 that the previous Conservative government acted unlawfully when it approved the Cambo and Rosebank projects. The court found that the government failed to consider the "scope 3" emissions associated with the burning of the extracted oil and gas, focusing solely on the emissions generated during the extraction process itself. This omission was deemed a critical flaw in the environmental assessment, as the vast majority of emissions from fossil fuels occur during their combustion. Environmental groups Greenpeace and Uplift, backed by nearly 100,000 individuals, brought the legal challenge, arguing that the government’s approval violated its own climate commitments and disregarded the overwhelming scientific consensus on the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels.
This case joins a growing body of climate litigation worldwide, where individuals and organizations are turning to the courts to hold governments and corporations accountable for their contributions to the climate crisis. In Sweden, for instance, the Aurora group is suing the state for inadequate climate policies. Internationally, the International Court of Justice is considering a request from the UN General Assembly to clarify the legal obligations of states regarding climate change, reflecting a growing international consensus on the need for stronger legal frameworks to address this global challenge.
The backdrop to these legal battles is the alarming reality of escalating global greenhouse gas emissions, despite increasing evidence of the devastating impacts of climate change. While scientists and international bodies like the International Energy Agency (IEA) have unequivocally stated that new fossil fuel development is incompatible with limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, political resistance to climate action remains a significant obstacle. The back-and-forth within the political landscape further complicates the matter, as demonstrated by previous shifts in US policy regarding the Paris Agreement and calls for "climate pauses" within the European Parliament. These developments underscore the challenges in achieving the global cooperation necessary to effectively address the climate crisis.
The High Court ruling, though a significant victory for climate campaigners, does not definitively end the possibility of the Cambo and Rosebank projects proceeding. The newly elected Labour government, which campaigned on a platform of tackling climate change, now faces the complex decision of whether to re-approve the projects, taking into account the full scope of their climate impacts. The government’s decision will be closely scrutinized, as it will signal the UK’s commitment to its climate targets and its willingness to prioritize climate action over short-term economic gains. Balancing the competing interests of energy security, economic development, and environmental protection will be a key challenge for the Labour government in navigating this politically sensitive issue.
While the legal battle over Cambo and Rosebank continues, the case has set an important precedent for climate litigation. The court’s recognition of the need to consider the full lifecycle emissions of fossil fuel projects strengthens the arguments against new fossil fuel development and reinforces the importance of aligning government decisions with climate commitments. This legal victory empowers climate activists and provides a powerful legal tool for future challenges against environmentally damaging projects. The outcome of the Labour government’s review will be crucial, not only for the future of these specific projects but also for the broader trajectory of the UK’s climate policy and its contribution to the global effort to mitigate climate change. The world will be watching closely as the UK government grapples with this critical decision.
The broader implications of this case extend beyond the UK. It serves as a potent example of the power of citizen action and legal challenges to hold governments accountable for their climate commitments. The growing wave of climate litigation globally signals increasing public awareness and concern about the climate crisis and the willingness to use legal mechanisms to drive climate action. This legal pressure, coupled with the increasing urgency of the climate crisis, may prove to be a critical force in accelerating the global transition to a sustainable future.
