Ruling Requires South Korean Government to Review Climate Targets

On 29 August 2024, South Korea’s Constitutional Court (the Court) ruled unanimously that a provision of the 2021 Framework Act on Carbon Neutrality and Green Growth for Coping with Climate Crisis (the Framework) does not conform to the constitution,For more detail, see the Court’s press release. failing to protect the rights of future generations and must be amended by February 2026.

South Korean youth activists initially filed a complaint in March 2020, alleging that the nation’s climate change rules violated their fundamental rights. This case, along with three others also alleging the unconstitutionality of the Framework and related texts, were consolidated in February 2024.

Details of the Decision

In a unanimous decision, the Court found that Article 8, Section 1 of the Framework does not conform with the Constitution and ordered the National Assembly of Korea to amend the law by February 2026. 

Article 8, Section 1 prescribes that the government shall set a national mid- and long-term greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction target to reduce national GHG emissions by a ratio prescribed by Presidential Decree not less than 35% from the 2018 level by 2030. In the Court’s view, the lack of legally binding targets for reductions beyond 2030 violate the constitutional rights of future generations and was in breach of the state’s duty to protect those rights.

The judgment refers in particular to Article 35 of South Korea’s Constitution, which states that “All citizens shall have the right to live in a healthy and pleasant environment. The State and the citizens shall endeavour to conserve the environment”.Constitution of the Republic of Korea. The Court found that the duty of the state and citizens to endeavour to conserve the environment “includes the duty of the State to address the climate crisis by taking measures to mitigate such risks through reducing the causes of climate change…”

According to the Court, the quantitative targets in the Framework fail to effectively guarantee gradual and continuous reductions up to 2050 due to the lack of quantitative standards. The Court found the GHG reduction targets are governed in a way that “shifts an excessive burden to the future”, and, therefore, lack the required minimum characteristic as a protective measure that corresponds with the risk situation of the climate crisis. As a result, the Court considered it appropriate to order the National Assembly to review and update the targets by February 2026.

The Court rejected and dismissed all other claims relating to the unconstitutionality of provisions of the Framework and its Enforcement Decree and the Carbon Neutrality Basic Plan.

Potential Implications

This decision has been described as a “first of its kind” in Asia, with similar lawsuits pending in Taiwan and Japan. It follows the recent ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in April 2024, in which the ECHR confirmed for the first time that the adverse impacts of climate change fall within the ambit of human rights protection under the European Convention of Human Rights, requiring Member States to implement effective mitigation measures.For more information on the ECHR rulings, refer to this Latham Client Alert.

Latham & Watkins will continue to monitor global climate-related litigation developments.