Lawsuits targeting fossil fuel companies over climate damage have increased, with allegations ranging from violations of state laws to demands for reparations and criminal charges.
Indigenous communities worldwide have achieved victories in halting oil and gas projects, highlighting the intersection of environmental law with human rights.
Researchers propose a new legal theory suggesting that oil and gas companies could face homicide charges for climate-related deaths, gaining support from legal communities and advocacy groups.
A wide range of organisations and communities are battling against oil majors and winning, as governments worldwide start putting the environment first. In the last few years, the number of lawsuits against oil and gas companies has risen significantly, as more judges rule in favour of indigenous communities and grassroots organisations when it comes to stopping the development of fossil fuel projects and protecting the environment. This trend is likely to continue, with governments and consumers putting increasing pressure on companies to improve their ESG practices and support a green transition.
In the U.S., there are currently at least thirty-two lawsuits targeting fossil fuel companies over climate damage. The companies accused of these damages include the oil majors Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron, Sunoco, Suncor, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Koch Industries, and the American Petroleum Institute. Environmental organisations and their lawyers are finding more grounds for lawsuits, as they claim that many oil and gas companies have violated consumer protection, public nuisance, failure to warn, fraud and racketeering laws. Some lawsuits are demanding that oil companies pay damages, while others hope to impose penalties or encourage greater education on climate threats while discouraging future greenwashing.
Most of the lawsuits claim that the companies in question have known about the impact of the continued drilling for oil and gas on climate change for several decades and have failed to act, instead choosing to spread misinformation and continue polluting operations. While several oil companies have pushed for the cases to be taken to federal court, where they believe they may be better protected, the U.S. Supreme Court has often ruled that cases alleging violations of state laws should be carried out in state court with a jury.
When it comes to indigenous communities, who are often overlooked, particularly when it comes to the exploitation of natural resources, there have been several wins against oil and gas companies in recent years. In India, Adivasi communities held protests that led officials to cancel the auction of land for coal mines in the biodiverse forests of Chhattisgarh State. In South Africa, planned development by Shell Global was halted after the Mpondo people fought against new oil and gas exploration off the Wild Coast. Meanwhile, in Australia, First Nations communities succeeded in blocking the construction of a new coal mine in Queensland.
These successes led the leaders of grass-roots environmental movements in six countries, including these groups, to win the Goldman Environmental Prize. Michael Sutton, the executive director of the Goldman Environmental Foundation, stated, “One of the things we’ve seen in recent years is that environmental law, protection of natural resources, has become intertwined with human rights law and the law of Indigenous people.”
Following several lawsuit wins against fossil fuel companies, scientists and environmental groups are becoming more ambitious in their legal aims. Researchers are now suggesting that oil and gas companies could be tried for homicide for climate-related deaths under a new legal theory. Public Citizen suggests that as fossil fuel companies fought to delay climate action, even when they knew about global warming, a case can be made that they committed reckless or negligent homicide. The advocacy non-profit Public Citizen first proposed the theory last year, and it has since gained traction. Aaron Regunberg, the senior policy counsel with Public Citizen’s climate programme, stated, “We’ve been really excited to see the curiosity, interest and support these ideas have garnered from members of the legal community, including from both former and current federal, state and local prosecutors.”
The organisation is now promoting the theory at some of the top law schools in the U.S., including Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard, University of Chicago and New York University. The proposal is also due to be published in the Harvard Law Review, supported by extensive evidence showing that the fossil fuel industry has long hidden information about the dangers of fossil fuel use from the public. Along with the charges being carried out in the existing lawsuits, fossil fuel companies could also face criminal charges under this new theory. David Arkush, who co-authored the paper on the proposal, explained, “Criminal law is how we say what is right and wrong in our society.” He added, “I think it’s important that some of the most damaging conduct in human history be squarely recognised and pursued as criminal.”
A spate of lawsuit wins against fossil fuel companies in recent years has encouraged more environmental lawyers, organisations, and communities to carry out legal action against oil majors. Some of the lawsuits call for reparations for damages while others seek to prevent further harm to the environment. These successes have been supported by the significant shift in approach to the energy sector by governments around the globe, as an increasing number of countries introduce ambitious climate targets in line with strategies for a green transition.
Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/
ENB Top News ENBEnergy DashboardENB PodcastENB Substack
Energy News Beat