France’s top administrative court found President government ineffective in its fight against . The court ordered the French leader to take “all necessary measures to curb the curve of greenhouse gas emissions”.
In a stern ultimatum that could cause Mr Macron some headaches just a month before the next Presidential elections, the court told the French leader he must comply with the ruling before March 31, 2022.
If the French government fails to comply, then France may face hefty fines.
This ruling comes after the city of Grande-Synthe in northern France, along with environmental NGOs, filed a complaint in 2018 over insufficient climate action.
Green MEP and former mayor of Grande-Synthe, Damien Careme, said the ruling was “historic”.
He told Politico: “For the first time in France, the judiciary forces the state to act for climate.”
Mr Careme said similar legal actions should be encouraged in other EU countries.
Germany and the Netherlands have also been urged to take more radical decisions to combat climate change by their respective courts.
The French MEP added: “At a time when the European Commission is about to propose a revision of the legislation related to climate action in its fit for 2030 package, this ruling should give the Commission pause to think on how it must come out with proposals that are fit for the challenges ahead.”
In February, President Macron received a damning attack from over 100 NGOs over his proposed climate change laws.
In an open letter to the French President, 110 NGOs, including Greenpeace, ActionAid and WWF, said Mr Macron “lacked ambition” with his legislation aimed at tackling climate change.
In the letter, the environmentalists attacked the French leader for “depriving our country of a tremendous potential to exit from climate, health, economic and social crises”.
The NGOs argued the package of laws failed to address all points raised by the assembly.
They wrote: “You have initiated an innovative approach through the Citizen’s Climate Convention aiming to involve citizens in the evolution of the law to keep our climate commitments in a spirit of social justice.
“While the citizens’ proposals were to be transcribed into law, it is clear that the account is not there. The impact study accompanying the bill drawn from the Citizen’s Convention thus recognises that the proposed measures will not, as they stand, meet the objectives of reducing emissions by 40 percent by 2030. And this, whereas this target is in itself insufficient given the new objective of -55 percent adopted last December at the European level.
“As for the Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) and the National Council for Ecological Transition (CNTE), recently consulted for an opinion on the bill, their opinions converge. They are indeed both worried about the inadequacy of the measures taken to achieve our objectives of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but also about the weakness of the mechanisms to reduce social inequalities.
“The EESC thus indicates that ‘the numerous measures of the bill, which are generally relevant, often remain limited, deferred or subject to conditions such that their implementation in the short term is uncertain’.
“This bill largely gives way to incitement and simple encouragement to change practices where government intervention is required.
“However, the expected benefits of the measures proposed by the 150 citizens are numerous: fewer people living in energy sieves, reduced air pollution, healthier food that is accessible to all, a mobility offer that emits less and more. inclusive, more jobs in key sectors of ecological transition, etc.”
The French President was also found guilty of inaction in the fight against climate change by a French court in February.
France’s government is at fault for not doing enough to combat climate change, a French court said on February 3, in what environmental campaigners called a landmark ruling that could ramp up pressure on other countries to act on global warming.
The ruling has been dubbed “the case of the century”.
It was brought by four NGOs who accused the French state of not living up to its own commitments – including a multi-year plan to cut carbon emissions – or to the 2015 Paris Climate accord.