English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article is written around the time a Dutch court ordered the corporate group Shell to cut its carbon emissions by 2030. The aim of the article is to contribute to the conceptualisation of the phenomenon this judgement unveils in terms of greening human rights litigation supported by the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). It addresses, firstly, how claiming the protection of the Earth before courts is occurring in a highly fragmented legal, economic and social context as a way to overcome the multiple obstacles flagged by the literature on the UNGPs. Secondly, it assesses how human rights litigation seeking global justice has evolved in waves with common trends, such as activism from social actors and courts that rely on arguments based on progressive soft law. Thirdly, it identifies two trends in the current wave of green litigation: the anthropocentric perspective that claims the protection of the Earth in the public interest and the ecocentric perspective that claims autonomous rights for Mother Earth. Finally, the article flags some gaps in this third wave of human rights litigation, particularly the risk of disregarding the third pillar of the UNGPs: access to an effective remedy for marginalised communities that are not aware of these ongoing developments.

The UNGPs on Business and Human Rights and the Greening of Human Rights Litigation: Fishing in Fragmented Waters?