Order the summer edition here

Is Section 112 of the Constitution seriously intended?

In the climate court case that Greenpeace and Nature and Youth have brought against the state, the Grandparents' climate action, which I represent, is a party helper. The Oslo District Court's ruling in January this year is a slap in the face of those who have seen the provision in the Constitution of Section 112 as a protection for important environmental interests. The verdict is pending and will appear in the Court of Appeal in November 2019. Whatever the outcome, it will probably end up in the Supreme Court.

Section 112 of the Constitution reads as follows: “Everyone has the right to an environment that ensures health, and to a nature where productive capacity and diversity are preserved. Nature's resources must be disposed of on the basis of a long-term and versatile consideration that safeguards this right also for posterity. Citizens have the right to knowledge about the state of the natural environment and about the effects of planned and implemented interventions in nature, so that they can safeguard the right they have. . .

Dear reader.
To continue reading, create a new free reader account with your email,
or logg inn if you have done it before. (click on forgotten password if you have not received it by email already).
Select if necessary Subscription (69kr)

Lund is a former Supreme Court judge and chair of the Lund committee. Today a member of Ny Tid's editorial board.

You may also like