Protecting the Rule of Law in Times of Climate Crisis: Strategic Climate Litigation as a Tool of Democratic Self-Preservation
Strategic climate litigation (SCL) has become a prominent mechanism through which civil society seeks to address inadequate climate action by governments and corporations. While critics often portray SCL as a challenge to democratic decisionmaking and the separation of powers, this project argues that it should instead be understood as a mechanism of democratic self-preservation. Rather than asking what political strategies climate activists pursue, this project asks why constitutional systems allow SCL in the first place. It argues that judicial review of climate matters performs a vital institutional function within European democracies confronted with both the climate crisis and the growing disregard for binding legal obligations. Drawing a parallel between climate litigation and rule-of-law litigation, the project conceptualises SCL as a countercyclical safeguard that protects the long-term conditions of democratic governance. It further examines how litigation enables civil society to translate demands for social change into legally institutionalised forms of contestation, thereby reinforcing rather than bypassing democratic institutions. Combining doctrinal legal analysis, socio-legal scholarship and participant observation, the project contributes to debates on climate litigation, the rule of law, and the constitutional role of civil society in Europe.
