Summary:
On 13 March 2020, nineteen teenagers from across South Korea initiated proceedings against their government (the National Assembly of Korea and the President of Korea), arguing that insufficient emissions reductions efforts were violating their constitutional rights. They alleged that Korean climate legislation (originally Article 42(1)1 of the Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth, and later also Article 8(1) of the domestic Carbon Neutrality Act (the “Carbon Neutrality and Green Growth Act” of 2021) was not compatible with their constitutional rights, bringing their case against the National Assembly for enacting the law and the government for implementing an administrative plan based on that law. Their constitutional complaint was combined with three other mitigation cases and decided by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Korea on 29 August 2024.
The applicants in this case are part of the Korean Youth 4 Climate Action Group, which has led the Korean ‘School Strike for Climate’ movement. They argued that, by not taking action to prevent the threats posed by climate change, the government had violated the right of younger generations to life and the pursuit of happiness (Article 10 of the Constitution), which they argue also enshrines the right to resist against human extinction, along with the right to live in a healthy and pleasant environment (Article 35(1) of the Constitution). They also contested inter-generational inequalities under the constitutional prohibition of discrimination (Article 11 of the Constitution) and invoked the duty of the State to prevent environmental disasters (Article 34(e) of the Constitution). In doing so, the applicants invoked the fatal risk posed by climate change and the irrevocable damage to be suffered by younger generations. As a major emitter of greenhouse gas emissions, they argued, Korea has an obligation to protect its citizens from the effects of climate change by taking stronger emissions reductions action.
Relevant interim developments:
On 30 December 2022, the Korean National Human Rights Commission issued an official statement to the President of Korea regarding climate change and human rights. Citing IPCC reports, UN findings, other instances of climate litigation (such as Urgenda and Neubauer) and the existence of different vulnerabilities, it found that “[a]s the climate crisis has far-reaching impacts on multiple human rights, including the rights to life, food, health and housing, the government should regard protecting and promoting the rights of everyone in the midst of climate crisis as its fundamental obligation and reform related laws and systems to address the climate crisis from a human rights perspective.”
On 12 June 2023, it was announced that the National Human Rights Commission of Korea had decided to submit an opinion to South Korea’s Constitutional Court to oppose the country’s Carbon Neutrality Act (2021), which it considered to be unconstitutional and in violation of the constitutional rights of future generations because it sets out a greenhouse gas emissions reductions target that was too low. The Act sets out a 40% emissions reductions target by 2030 as compared to 2018 levels. This, the Commission found, did not respect the constitutional principle of equality, because it passed the burden of greenhouse gas emissions on to future generations.
Timeline of the case (by Youth 4 Climate Action Korea):
- 13 March 2020: Youth 4 Climate Action files a constitutional petition
- 25 March 2020: Notice of referral from the Constitutional Court
- 28 September 2020: Submission of supplementary opinion on constitutional petition (1)
- 29 October 2020: Defendants submit presidential opinion
- 26 January 2021: Submission of supplementary opinion (2)
- 15 April 2021: Submission of supplementary opinion (3)
- 23 July 2021: Submission of supplementary opinion (4)
- 23 September 2021: Submission of supplementary opinion (5) on constitutional petition
- 13 March 2022: Additional constitutional petition filed against the Carbon Neutrality Basic Act
- 8 June 2022: Additional constitutional petition filed against the Enforcement Decree of the Carbon Neutrality Basic Act
- 31 May 2023: Submission of supplementary opinion (6)
- 22 August 2023: National Human Rights Commission submits opinion to Constitutional Court on ‘Unconstitutionality of Carbon Neutrality Basic Act’
- 28 December 2023: Defendant submits presidential opinion to Constitutional Court
- 15 March 15, 2024: Brief submission
- 29 March 2024: Defendant submits a witness statement (Ahn Young-hwan) to the Constitutional Court
- 29 March 2024: Defendant submits a witness statement (Yoo Yeon-cheol) to the Constitutional Court
- 1 April 2024: Submission of the reference opinion (Jo Cheon-ho)
- 1 April 2024: Submission of the reference opinion (Park Deok-young)
- 23 April 2024: First public hearing
- 13 May 2024: Submission of supplementary brief
- 14 May 2024: Ministry of Environment, Office for Government Policy Coordination submit opinion paper
- 21 May 2024: Second public hearing, final statement by the plaintiff
- 29 August 2024: Judgment of Constitutional Court
Consolidation with three other cases:
The South Korean Constitutional Court decided to consolidate its first four climate cases (Do-Hyun Kim et al. v. South Korea (the present case), Woodpecker et al. v. South Korea (Baby Climate Litigation), Climate Crisis Emergency Action v. South Korea (a.k.a. Byung-In Kim et al. v. South Korea) and Min-A Park v. South Korea. Public hearings in the cases were held on 23 April 2024 and 21 May 2024.
These cases all alleged that the government’s inadequate greenhouse gas reduction targets violated citizens’ fundamental rights, particularly those of future generations. Together, the four cases comprised over 250 plaintiffs, including civil society, youth and children. The Constitutional Court issued a joint ruling in these cases on 29 August 2024.
Judgment of the constitutional court:
On 29 August 2024, the South Korean constitutional court ruled. It found a violation of constitutional rights in this case and three related cases. In an unanimous ruling, hailed as “the first decision of its kind in Asia“, the court found that the government’s response to the climate crisis was inadequate and threatened constitutional rights, noting that the country lacked legally binding long-term emissions reductions targets for the post-2031 period, which violated the constitutional rights of future generations by shifting an excessive reductions burden to the future. The court gave government and legislature 18 months (until 28 February 2026) to introduce the relevant targets.
In particular, the Court ruled that Article 8(1) of the South Korean Carbon Neutrality Basic Act was unconstitutional. Previously, the government had pledged a 40% reduction of its GHG emissions by 2030 compared to 2018 levels, but had failed to set any targets since. The Constitutional Court held that this “does not have the minimum character necessary as a protective measure corresponding to the dangerous situation of the climate crisis”, citing the “principle of non-underprotection”, which means that the State must take appropriate measures to effectively protect the constitutional rights of its citizens.
Simultaneously, the Court held that the government’s target for 2030 did not infringe constitutional rights.
Status of the case:
Decided. On 29 August 2024, the South Korean constitutional court found a violation of the constitutional rights of future generations in this case.
More information on the case:
For a press report on the case, see here.
On the National Human Rights Commission of Korea’s intervention, see this article in the Korea Herald.
The submissions in the case, including an unofficial English translation of the complaint prepared by the applicants’ counsel, are available via ClimateCaseChart.
For a summary of the constitutional court’s ruling, see here.
Full text of the judgment (Korean):
Suggested citation:
Constitutional Court of South Korea, Do-Hyun Kim and 18 others v. South Korea, judgment of 29 August 2024.
Last updated:
29 August 2024.