By Uswa Khalid
Climate change is hitting Pakistan hard. Rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, floods, and droughts are everyday realities. While Pakistan produces a minor amount of global greenhouse gases, it ranks among the most vulnerable nations to climate impacts. This raises a critical issue: who will protect citizens from these environmental threats? With the executive and legislative branches often slow to act, many are turning to the courts for solutions.
Climate litigation is emerging as a key tool in Pakistan, and it’s gaining traction as more people recognize their constitutional rights. Courts are beginning to link environmental health to fundamental rights, such as the right to life. This shift allows citizens to challenge government inaction on climate issues as a violation of their rights to a clean and safe environment.
A pivotal case in this movement is that of farmer Asghar Leghari against the Federation of Pakistan. He argued that the government’s failure to implement climate policies infringed upon his constitutional rights. The Lahore High Court agreed, noting that inaction on climate issues directly impacts citizens’ lives, food security, and water availability. This groundbreaking ruling led to the creation of a Climate Change Commission to ensure policies are enforced, marking a significant shift from climate policy discussions to legal accountability.
As courts become more involved, they are expanding the definition of the right to life to encompass a healthy environment. In Pakistan, environmental degradation is increasingly viewed not just as a political issue, but a human rights violation. Courts have also begun to monitor government efforts, demanding regular updates on climate policy implementation. In some instances, they have even established committees to ensure follow-through on their decisions.
Most climate litigation is driven by public interest, often initiated by citizens, lawyers, and activists representing vulnerable groups like farmers and communities in pollution-prone areas. These suits argue that government inaction harms public health and livelihoods. The judiciary is emerging as a crucial venue for climate justice in a country where enforcement of laws is often weak.
Despite these advancements, challenges remain. One major hurdle is enforcement; government agencies often drag their feet on implementing court orders, even when rulings are strong. Moreover, Pakistan lacks comprehensive climate-specific laws, leading courts to interpret the general constitution instead of relying on clear statutes. Many environmental agencies struggle with capacity and resources, hindering their ability to act on court directives. Political and economic pressures also complicate climate actions, with development priorities often overshadowing environmental needs.
Can courts truly drive climate action in Pakistan? They have certainly raised awareness and forced government accountability. However, the judiciary cannot solve the climate crisis alone. They lack budgets, policy planning, and the overarching governance needed for sustained change. Addressing climate change requires cooperation across all governmental branches and active support from society and international organizations.
Globally, climate litigation is becoming a vital part of environmental governance. Some countries have seen courts compel governments and corporations to act on climate. In contrast, Pakistan’s focus is on adaptation and survival rather than reduction of emissions, as it contributes minimally to global pollution but faces severe vulnerabilities.
In summary, climate litigation in Pakistan is reshaping how environmental issues are perceived and treated by the legal system. Courts are playing a vital role in protecting constitutional rights and holding the government accountable. Yet, real change will depend on robust policy, strong institutions, and determined political will. The judiciary’s role is important but supportive; comprehensive action must come from the entire state apparatus.
