Finland's Climate Act (423/2022) was amended to include new provisions on the climate plans of municipalities and on appeals concerning decisions made under the Climate Act. According to section 16 of the Finnish Climate Act, “[t]he Government shall monitor the implementation of the climate policy plans […] adequately to determine whether the targets concerning climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in the plans and the objectives referred to […] will be achieved. On the basis of the monitoring, the Government shall, if necessary, decide on the additional measures required to achieve the targets.“ The new Climate Change Act sets a target of reaching carbon neutrality by 2035 – a target recommended by Finland’s Climate Council. With the new law, there is now a legal obligation to reach carbon neutrality by 2035. However, the collapse of Finland’s carbon sinks in 2021 has created a situation where the government’s climate policy plans are insufficient for meeting the Climate Act’s targets. The reason is due to the intensive forest logging and the slowing down of forest growth that has become a source of greenhouse emissions.

The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation (FANC) and Greenpeace filed an appeal at the Supreme Administrative Court in Finland alleging a breach of the Finnish Climate Act, essentially claiming that the Finnish Government has neglected its duty to properly assess and decide on the need for additional measures pertaining to climate change mitigation when it decided to provide the Finnish Parliament with the Annual Climate Report. The environmental groups argued that the government had ignored its own laws by failing to protect the Nordic nation's carbon sinks which have fallen below the climate plans and to comply with the Climate Act, hence, the environmental groups demanded that the Finnish Government’s decision with respect to the Annual Climate Report 2022 be revoked and sent back to preparation. 
The environmental organizations specifically refer to the obligations under the Paris Agreement, arguing that “Greenpeace and the Finnish Nature Conservation Union believe it is important to seek guidance from the court on whether the monitoring and updating of the progress of climate action works as it should according to the law and the parliament intention to act in the light of the statements. At the same time, it is the first time that more effective implementation of climate measures is demanded in Finland through legal channels.” 

In the judgment on 7.6.2023, the Court found the case to be inadmissible on procedural grounds. The Court’s majority based its ruling on the well-established principle in Finnish administrative law that inaction does not constitute grounds for an administrative appeal, thereby finding the case inadmissible. The Court also emphasized:

"According to best available science, climate change is a question of humanity's fate, which threatens the living conditions of current and future generations on Earth, unless quick and effective measures are taken in terms of maintaining and increasing emission limits and carbon sinks. Therefore, postponing action shifts the responsibility into the future and makes it difficult to achieve the maximum 1.5 degree temperature goal enshrined in the Paris Agreement. The primary responsibility for fulfilling international [climate] obligations rests with democratically elected political decision makers. It is the court's job to ensure, on the basis of an appeal, that the decisions of political decision-makers are in accordance with the law and do not prevent the realization of human and fundamental rights."

The Court’s majority justified their decision with more detail than usual when dismissing a case on procedural grounds. The Court’s reasoning also includes a statement according to which:

The Supreme Administrative Court finds that (…) the legality of the Government's decision-making procedure in the manner intended by the appellant could be examined by a court of law in a case, in which failing to make the decision at this stage would lead to an end result in violation of the Climate Act, or the de facto actions of the Government would prove that it has no intention of making the appropriate decisions in order to achieve the targets and obligations required by the Act on a sufficiently rapid schedule. (Para. 69 of the Court’s Decision KHO:2023:62, emphasis added)

The Court dismissed the appeal after a 3-2 vote. A minority of two judges argued that the government had in fact taken a justiciable decision not to adopt additional climate policies. Their dissenting opinion emphasizes, inter alia, the strong link between climate change and human rights, as well as the need to provide access to legal remedies at the domestic level.

Finnish Association for Nature Conservation and Greenpeace v. Finland

<p>This entry was provided by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Please see the terms of use for citation and licensing of third party data.</p>

Finnish Association for Nature Conservation and Greenpeace v. Finland - judgment

Filed

Finland's Climate Act (423/2022) was amended to include new provisions on the climate plans of municipalities and on appeals concerning decisions made under the Climate Act. According to section 16 of the Finnish Climate Act, “[t]he Government shall monitor the implementation of the climate policy plans […] adequately to determine whether the targets concerning climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in the plans and the objectives referred to […] will be achieved. On the basis of the monitoring, the Government shall, if necessary, decide on the additional measures required to achieve the targets.“ The new Climate Change Act sets a target of reaching carbon neutrality by 2035 – a target recommended by Finland’s Climate Council. With the new law, there is now a legal obligation to reach carbon neutrality by 2035. However, the collapse of Finland’s carbon sinks in 2021 has created a situation where the government’s climate policy plans are insufficient for meeting the Climate Act’s targets. The reason is due to the intensive forest logging and the slowing down of forest growth that has become a source of greenhouse emissions.

The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation (FANC) and Greenpeace filed an appeal at the Supreme Administrative Court in Finland alleging a breach of the Finnish Climate Act, essentially claiming that the Finnish Government has neglected its duty to properly assess and decide on the need for additional measures pertaining to climate change mitigation when it decided to provide the Finnish Parliament with the Annual Climate Report. The environmental groups argued that the government had ignored its own laws by failing to protect the Nordic nation's carbon sinks which have fallen below the climate plans and to comply with the Climate Act, hence, the environmental groups demanded that the Finnish Government’s decision with respect to the Annual Climate Report 2022 be revoked and sent back to preparation. 
The environmental organizations specifically refer to the obligations under the Paris Agreement, arguing that “Greenpeace and the Finnish Nature Conservation Union believe it is important to seek guidance from the court on whether the monitoring and updating of the progress of climate action works as it should according to the law and the parliament intention to act in the light of the statements. At the same time, it is the first time that more effective implementation of climate measures is demanded in Finland through legal channels.” 

In the judgment on 7.6.2023, the Court found the case to be inadmissible on procedural grounds. The Court’s majority based its ruling on the well-established principle in Finnish administrative law that inaction does not constitute grounds for an administrative appeal, thereby finding the case inadmissible. The Court also emphasized:

"According to best available science, climate change is a question of humanity's fate, which threatens the living conditions of current and future generations on Earth, unless quick and effective measures are taken in terms of maintaining and increasing emission limits and carbon sinks. Therefore, postponing action shifts the responsibility into the future and makes it difficult to achieve the maximum 1.5 degree temperature goal enshrined in the Paris Agreement. The primary responsibility for fulfilling international [climate] obligations rests with democratically elected political decision makers. It is the court's job to ensure, on the basis of an appeal, that the decisions of political decision-makers are in accordance with the law and do not prevent the realization of human and fundamental rights."

The Court’s majority justified their decision with more detail than usual when dismissing a case on procedural grounds. The Court’s reasoning also includes a statement according to which:

The Supreme Administrative Court finds that (…) the legality of the Government's decision-making procedure in the manner intended by the appellant could be examined by a court of law in a case, in which failing to make the decision at this stage would lead to an end result in violation of the Climate Act, or the de facto actions of the Government would prove that it has no intention of making the appropriate decisions in order to achieve the targets and obligations required by the Act on a sufficiently rapid schedule. (Para. 69 of the Court’s Decision KHO:2023:62, emphasis added)

The Court dismissed the appeal after a 3-2 vote. A minority of two judges argued that the government had in fact taken a justiciable decision not to adopt additional climate policies. Their dissenting opinion emphasizes, inter alia, the strong link between climate change and human rights, as well as the need to provide access to legal remedies at the domestic level. 

The Climate Litigation Database

Find climate change litigation data and indicators for {text}.

{text} litigation

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law provides Climate Litigation Database, a comprehensive database of US and Global climate change caselaw

Quickly and easily search through the complete text of thousands of climate change law and policy documents from every country.

Search the Climate Litigation Database

An aim to achieve a quantifiable outcome within a given time-frame, set by an institution such as a national government.

Policy instruments are techniques or tools used by governing authorities to promote certain policies in order to achieve predetermined goals. Put simply, instruments are how a government tries to achieve its goals, with this taxonomy being focused on national policy instruments.

Risk is the potential for adverse consequences resulting from the dynamic interplay between (climate-related) hazards, exposure, and vulnerability of affected human or ecological systems.

Groups  of people who are adversely affected by climate change or the response to it

A set of principles, processes, and practices that build economic and political power to shift from an extractive economy to a regenerative economy.

Justice is the ethical and political framework that addresses fairness, including issues of responsibility, rights, and structural inequity.

Renewable energy means all forms of energy produced from renewable sources in a sustainable manner.

Fossil fuel is a generic term for non-renewable energy sources such as coal, fossil gas, and oil (including crude oil, and petroleum products), that can be used for electricity and heat generation. Fossil fuels are hydrocarbons formed from pressurised and heated organic material buried over millions of years.

Molecules in the atmosphere that play a key role in the greenhouse effect by trapping heat radiating from Earth’s surface.

Area of the economy in which actors engage in identical or related activities.

In human systems, the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate change and its effects, in order to moderate harm, increase resilience or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, the process of adjustment to actual climate change and its effects; human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate change and its effects.

The management and allocation of funds, assets and investments to meet various objectives

Tradable permits are market-based tools that grant permission for specific activities, frequently used to regulate emissions. These permits can be issued within a trading system to manage environmental impacts.

A target to reduce the prevalence of a greenhouse gas over a specific time frame

A commitment to balance GHG emissions with removal by a certain point in time, effectively reducing the net emissions to zero

Using laws and the legal system more broadly to protect vulnerable entities

Conditions that enhance the feasibility of adaptation options. Enabling conditions include finance, technological innovation, strengthening policy instruments, institutional capacity, multi-level governance and changes in human behaviour and lifestyles.

A long-lived, colourless gas, chiefly emitted from fossil fuel combustion, deforestation and cement production.

Terrestrial means "of the earth" and relates to the risks to ecological system that includes all living organisms and their interactions within land-based environments, such as forests, grasslands, and deserts.

Social inclusion is the process of improving the terms on which individuals and groups take part in society—improving the ability, opportunity, and dignity of those disadvantaged on the basis of their identity.

Activities of government agencies and institutions that provide public services, enforce laws and manage public resources.

Activities that relate to the production of goods and services from forests.

Slow onset events evolve gradually from incremental changes over many years or from increased frequency or intensity of recurring events. As defined in the Cancun Adaptation Framework (2010), slow onset events include risks and impacts from rising temperatures, desertification, biodiversity loss, land and forest degradation, glacial retreat, ocean acidification, sea level rise, and salinization.

Geohazards are adverse geological phenomenon's that are capable of causing widespread damage or loss to property, life and the environment, such as earthquakes, volcano eruptions and tsunamis. Climate change can increase the frequency and severity of some geohazards, such as landslides, and soil erosion.

Finnish Association for Nature Conservation and Greenpeace v. Finland - judgment

Target

Policy instrument

Risk

Impacted group

Just transition

Greenhouse gas

Economic sector

Adaptation/resilience