2021 年 10 巻 2 号 p. 32-50
In October 2019, the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) adopted a landmark ruling marking the first decision by a UN human rights treaty body based on a complaint filed by an individual seeking protection from the adverse effects of climate change. The case concerned a national of Kiribati who sought asylum in New Zealand claiming that the effects of climate change and sea level rise in his native country violated his right to life under article 6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). While the HRC determined there had been no violation of his right to life in this particular case, it warned that before the entire country become submerged by rising sea levels, conditions of life in such a country may become incompatible with the right to life with dignity. This article examines what made this landmark ruling possible by analysing its background of broader international legal and policy framework surrounding so-called climate refugees. Subsequently, it reviews some of the possible ramifications that the ruling may have on areas of debate regarding the potential of international human rights law for the protection of migrants and refugees within the emerging refugee protection mechanism. It considers that this case sets forth new guidance that could serve as a basis for future climate change-related asylum claims by recognising for the first time that forcibly returning a person to a place where his life would be at risk due to the adverse effects of climate change may violate the right to life under article 6 ICCPR. It is built on the interpretation of right to life with dignity based on intersectionality of civil and political rights and economic and socio-cultural ones. This article concludes that international human rights law may be able to address the current protection gap, on the grounds of right to life interpreted in a non-restrictive manner, responding to the call for universal legal instruments for climate migrants.
