Saul Luciano Lliuya, a farmer from Peru, is suing German firm RWE for contributing to climate change, claiming their emissions have endangered his hometown by causing glacier melt and increased flooding risks. The case seeks to make RWE financially responsible for part of the cost of flood defenses due to its share of global emissions. A ruling could set a significant precedent for future climate litigation.
A Peruvian farmer, Saul Luciano Lliuya, is suing German energy giant RWE over its contribution to climate change, marking a significant event in climate litigation. The case is set to be heard by the Higher Regional Court of Hamm, where Lliuya will argue that RWE’s emissions have led to the melting of Andean glaciers, jeopardizing his hometown by increasing the risk of flooding from Laguna Pacacocha. He seeks to hold RWE accountable for roughly 21,000 euros, corresponding to its share of global emissions.
Lliuya’s lawsuit, filed in 2015 with support from Germanwatch, asserts that RWE’s greenhouse gas emissions have raised water levels, posing extreme flood risks to Huaraz. He estimates that RWE’s emissions account for nearly 0.5% of global manmade greenhouse gases since the industrial revolution and demands that they fund a fraction of the flood defense project’s estimated $3.5 million costs.
The legal proceedings have been lengthy, beginning in Essen, where the initial regional court dismissed the claims. It argued that many global carbon dioxide emitters exist, thus RWE should not be solely responsible for the potential flooding risks. Lliuya appealed, leading to the current hearing after expert studies delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The case relies on section 1004 of the Civil Law Code, which allows property owners to seek relief if their property is interfered with. If the court finds that the risks claimed by Lliuya are valid, it will evaluate the extent of RWE’s emissions contributing to these flooding risks in a subsequent phase. The upcoming hearing is focused on expert assessments regarding flood threats.
Interest in the case is heightened due to its potential to set a legal precedent for holding corporations accountable for climate change impacts. RWE insists the claims are invalid, stating that no single emitter can be blamed for global warming. Despite transitioning away from coal, RWE still operates several coal and gas plants and asserts significant reductions in CO2 emissions in recent years, with plans to phase out lignite completely by 2030.
The legal case brought by Saul Luciano Lliuya against RWE could transform the accountability landscape for corporations in relation to climate change. The outcome may establish a precedent for future legal actions, reinforcing the potential for individuals affected by climate change to seek restitution from major emissions contributors. As climate litigation grows, the implications of this case could influence how companies manage their environmental impact and address stakeholder concerns.
Original Source: www.stabroeknews.com
