Eine völkerrechtliche Außenperspektive auf die extraterritoriale Geltung der EMRK im Zusammenhang mit den »Klimaklagen« vor dem EGMR

The climate cases before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) raise fundamental questions about the extraterritorial application of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), particularly regarding the scope of human rights obligations in addressing cross-border environmental issues such as climate change. This highlights a tension between the traditional, territory-based interpretation of treaty law and the functional approach of international legal responsibility. While there is a general presumption of territoriality in treaty law, according to which treaties bind parties within their entire territory, in the realm of international responsibility the focus shifts to the functional attribution of state conduct, holding a state accountable for violations of obligations regardless of where the conduct occurs. The jurisprudence of the ECtHR, such as Banković and M. N. v. Belgium, emphasizes the presumption of territorial jurisdiction, limiting the ECHR's application to the espace juridique, the territory of the States parties to the ECHR, unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated. While the ECtHR permitted the Convention's extraterritorial application in specific situations, such as in cases of effective control over territory or individuals, it continues to approach such extensions with caution. Consequently, in the recent climate case of Duarte Agostinho, the Court declined to expand jurisdiction to cover climate change impacts extraterritorially, arguing that such an approach would transform the ECHR into a global environmental treaty, conflicting with its original purpose.