Climate Case Japan, an activist group campaigning to establish climate change as a human rights issue, has petitioned the Japanese Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA), as reported by the Japan Times.
The group is requesting the JFBA to pick up the initiative to address climate change “through legal means”, which includes using the JFBA’s access to the Japanese government to make formal requests for climate action. The JFBA has a track record of helping to determine policy-making direction in Japan.
Climate litigation in Japan has not yet taken off to the same extent as in other countries. According to Climate Case Japan, it is difficult for individuals to bring climate litigation cases in Japan. The number of cases brought by individuals stands at only four.
Japanese courts have so far refused to recognise a right to be free from carbon emissions, classifying it as a legislative issue instead. However, this has not deterred climate activists from continuing with their litigatory efforts.
Climate Litigation in Japan
Japan’s first climate litigation was brought back in 2017, in Sendai Citizens v Sendai Power Station (Sendai), where a group of 124 citizens claimed that the newly opened Sendai Power Station harmed their personal rights to life, health, and bodily integrity, the right to a peaceful life, and the right to biodiversity. The Sendai District Court at the first instance, and the Sendai High Court on appeal, both rejected the claims that the Sendai Power Station was causing pollution that was harmful to the citizens’ rights.
Next, Japan saw a series of climate cases regarding the Kobe Coal-Fired Power Plant. One civil law complaint and two administrative law complaints were filed regarding the plant’s climate impact. In the civil case, tort claims similar to those in Sendai were made. In March 2023, the Kobe District Court rejected the case, and an appeal has been filed. The two administrative claims (in Kobe and Yokosuka respectively) challenged the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry’s actions, arguing that he did not exercise his regulatory power by failing to prevent the establishment of coal-fired power plants. These complaints have suffered from issues related to standing, as individuals are not deemed the correct plaintiff in a matter of public interest.
No Urgenda-style climate litigation, which aims to challenge policy-making regarding climate action, has taken place in Japan yet.
Comments