Greenpeace Nordic and Natur og Ungdom highlight that the impact assessments of global climate effects of the three oil fields, named Yggdrasil, Tyrving and Breidablikk, are either non-existent or highly inadequate. This should render the approvals invalid as they violate the Norwegian people’s constitutional and human rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, amongst other legal sources.
The Norwegian government did not contest the effects of the climate crisis but argued that Norwegian oil and gas would have a positive net effect on the climate.
The State’s Attorney tried to portray Norway as a climate leader by reiterating how “gloomy” the climate prognoses are while justifying the oil and gas expansion. Independent expert witnesses supported the Plaintiffs’ case and testified that the state’s claims are scientifically invalid.
The new legal action builds upon legal precedent established in another climate lawsuit brought by the same organizations. It resulted in a judgement by the Norwegian Supreme Court in 2020, and later, an application to the European Court of Human Rights, now pending. The organizations point to the Supreme Court’s finding that the Norwegian state must assess the global climate effects of new oil and gas fields before their approval.
The judge is expected to make a decision by the end of January.