Climate change represents one of the most pressing challenges for the international community. Its catastrophic consequences are capable of posing a serious threat to the enjoyment of fundamental human rights. This is particularly true for all those countries that are economically disadvantaged, unable to take adequate measures to counter and mitigate these effects. In the long run, due to rising sea levels, some of them might even disappear, raising various questions regarding the alleged legal extinction of states that no longer have their own territory. In this context, migration is not only a logical, but also the only choice for some people most exposed to certain risks. As highlighted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), through the publication of a document in October 2020, the possibility of recognising the refugee status to 'climate migrants' should not be automatically excluded, on the basis of the absence of climate change among the grounds mentioned in Article 1 of the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention. In addition, the recent decision of the UN Human Rights Committee in the case Teitiota v. New Zealand, acknowledged that climate change is capable of triggering non-refoulement’s obligations, whenever return to the country of origin may pose serious risks to the right to life and the prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment. Finally, it is worth to remember that all migrants are human rights holders and in recent years climate litigations have contributed to a strengthening of states’ obligations, going so far as to recognise the possibility, for citizens of foreign countries, to invoke a violation before the courts of the responsible country for failure to fulfil its climate obligations climate (see the judgment in Neubauer et al. v. Germany).
il cambiamento climatico rappresenta una delle sfide più impellenti per la comunità internazionale. Le sue conseguenze catastrofiche sono in grado di costituire un serio ostacolo per il godimento di diritti umani fondamentali. Ciò è particolarmente vero per tutti quei Paesi economicamente svantaggiati e quindi incapaci di adottare adeguate misure di contrasto e mitigazione dei suddetti effetti. Nel lungo periodo, a causa dell’innalzamento del livello del mare, alcuni di essi potrebbero addirittura scomparire, sollevando una serie di questioni relative alla presunta estinzione legale degli Stati che non dispongono più del loro territorio. In tale contesto, la migrazione è non solo una scelta logica, ma anche l’unica possibilità per alcune popolazioni maggiormente esposte a certi rischi. Come evidenziato dall’Alto Commissariato delle Nazioni Unite per i rifugiati (UNHCR), attraverso la pubblicazione di un documento nell’ottobre del 2020, la possibilità di riconoscere lo status di rifugiato ai “migranti climatici” non dovrebbe essere automaticamente esclusa, in virtù dell’assenza del cambiamento climatico tra i motivi indicati all’art. 1, lett. a, par. 2 della Convenzione di Ginevra sullo status dei rifugiati del 1951. In più, la recente decisione del Comitato ONU per i diritti umani relativa al caso Teitiota c. Nuova Zelanda, ha riconosciuto come il cambiamento climatico sia in grado di innescare gli obblighi derivanti dal divieto di respingimento (non-refoulement), ogniqualvolta il ritorno nel Paese d’origine possa comportare seri rischi per il diritto alla vita e il divieto di tortura e trattamenti inumani e degradanti. L’obiettivo del presente progetto è, anche tramite lo studio delle norme del regime climatico internazionale e dei principali contenziosi climatici (climate litigations), quello di individuare le forme protezione di cui possono beneficiare i “migranti climatici” e di riflettere sui possibili sviluppi normativi di tale materia.
La tutela dei "migranti climatici" nel diritto internazionale
BASILE, VINCENZO
2026
Abstract
Climate change represents one of the most pressing challenges for the international community. Its catastrophic consequences are capable of posing a serious threat to the enjoyment of fundamental human rights. This is particularly true for all those countries that are economically disadvantaged, unable to take adequate measures to counter and mitigate these effects. In the long run, due to rising sea levels, some of them might even disappear, raising various questions regarding the alleged legal extinction of states that no longer have their own territory. In this context, migration is not only a logical, but also the only choice for some people most exposed to certain risks. As highlighted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), through the publication of a document in October 2020, the possibility of recognising the refugee status to 'climate migrants' should not be automatically excluded, on the basis of the absence of climate change among the grounds mentioned in Article 1 of the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention. In addition, the recent decision of the UN Human Rights Committee in the case Teitiota v. New Zealand, acknowledged that climate change is capable of triggering non-refoulement’s obligations, whenever return to the country of origin may pose serious risks to the right to life and the prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment. Finally, it is worth to remember that all migrants are human rights holders and in recent years climate litigations have contributed to a strengthening of states’ obligations, going so far as to recognise the possibility, for citizens of foreign countries, to invoke a violation before the courts of the responsible country for failure to fulfil its climate obligations climate (see the judgment in Neubauer et al. v. Germany).| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Tesi dottorato Basile.pdf
accesso aperto
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione
274.86 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
274.86 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in UNITESI sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14242/361611
URN:NBN:IT:UNIOR-361611