HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED CLIMATE LITIGATION AND THE ROLE OF UNGA RESOLUTION 76/300: TOWARDS A RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW?

This dissertation explores the potential and challenges of employing international human rights law to address the impacts of climate change, with a specific focus on the emerging right to a healthy environment under international law. It begins by tracing the gradual ‘greening’ of established human rights, such as the rights to life, health, and private and family life, through environmental litigation. Indeed, over time these rights have been increasingly interpreted to encompass environmental dimensions, enabling individuals and communities to seek redress for harms caused by environmental degradation, including those linked to climate change. This development reflects a broader ‘rights turn’ in climate litigation. This shift is expected to gain renewed momentum following the recognition of the right to a healthy environment by the United Nations General Assembly in Resolution 76/300 (2022). Therefore, the research critically examines whether this right has acquired meaningful legal status under international law, whether as a customary norm, a general principle, or an interpretative standard, and assesses its practical relevance in ongoing and emerging climate-related litigation before international courts and judicial or quasi-judicial bodies. Drawing on a wide range of sources, including treaty law, jurisprudence, state practice, and soft law instruments, the thesis investigates how (and whether) this right is being invoked, interpreted, and operationalized across legal systems. While the strategic use of human rights frameworks, particularly the right to a healthy environment, offers new avenues for climate accountability, the research also identifies significant conceptual and procedural limitations. These include issues of justiciability, causation, legal standing, and the relationship between environmental and human rights obligations. The findings suggest that although international adjudicatory bodies have become increasingly receptive to environmental claims, the normative clarity and enforceability of the right to a healthy environment remain contested.