(a) The right to life is protected under Article 2 of the Convention: This Article does … lays down a positive obligation on States to take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those within their jurisdiction. This means that public authorities have a duty to take steps to guarantee the rights of the Convention even when they are threatened by other (private) persons or activities that are not directly connected with the State.

1. (...) in some situations Article 2 may also impose on public authorities a duty to take steps to guarantee the right to life when it is threatened by persons or activities not directly connected with the State. (...) In the context of the environment, Article 2 has been applied where certain activities endangering the environment are so dangerous that they also endanger human life. This passage was cited by the District Court of the Hague in the Netherlands in 2015 in a case brought by the Urgenda Foundation against the Dutch Government8. The court stated at paragraph 4.74 of its judgement: If, and this is the case here, there is a high risk of dangerous climate change with severe and life-threatening consequences for man and the environment, the State has the obligation to protect its citizens from it by taking appropriate and effective measures. For this approach, it can also rely on the aforementioned jurisprudence of the [European Court of Human Rights]. Naturally, the question remains what is fitting and effective in the given circumstances. The starting point must be that in its decision-making process the State carefully considers the various interests. The Court concluded that the Dutch Government was not doing enough to protect its people: Based on the foregoing, the court concludes that the State – apart from the defence to be discussed below – has acted negligently and therefore unlawfully towards Urgenda …9 In making the connection between climate change and interference with the right to life, the Petition simply reflects accepted principles of international human rights law. Moreover it is clear that this interference is particularly acute in The Philippines. According to the Germanwatch Report (referred to above), the annual death toll in the Philippines attributable to climate change (for the period 1994 to 2013) is nearly 1000 people a year. In 2013, it was close to 6,500 (more than twice the number killed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US). If the universal right to life demands positive action in The Netherlands, it must do so with even greater force in The 8 The Urgenda Foundation v. Kingdom of the Netherlands, District Court of the Hague [2015] HAZA c/09/00456689, June 2015 9 Ibid. Para. 4.93 11