reason of any life-endangering circumstances, the status of those involved in bringing about such circumstances, and whether the acts or omissions attributable to them were deliberate are merely factors among others that must be taken into account in the examination of the merits of a particular case, with a view to determining the responsibility the State may bear under Article 2. The Court concluded that: the applicant’s complaint … undoubtedly falls within the ambit of the first sentence of Article 2. It emphasized (at para 89) that: The positive obligation to take all appropriate steps to safeguard life for the purposes of Article 2 … entails above all a primary duty on the State to put in place a legislative and administrative framework designed to provide effective deterrence against threats to the right to life Of particular relevance in this context, given the evidence, referred to in the Petition, that some of the carbon majors have supported the dissemination of deliberate misinformation regarding the risks from anthropogenic greenhouse gases, is the Court’s finding on the importance of accurate information (para. 90 and para. 108): Among these preventive measures, particular emphasis should be placed on the public’s right to information, as established in the case-law of the Convention institutions. The Court will next assess the weight to be attached to the issue of respect for the public’s right to information ... It observes in this connection that the Government have not shown that any measures were taken in the instant case to provide the inhabitants of the Ümraniye slums with information enabling them to assess the risks they might run as a result of the choices they had made. In any event, the Court considers that in the absence of more practical measures to avoid the risks to the lives of the inhabitants of the Ümraniye slums, even the fact of having respected the right to information would not have been sufficient to absolve the State of its responsibilities. The Court notes the importance of effective deterrence against violations of the right to life (para. 91): The obligations deriving from Article 2 do not end there. Where lives have been lost in circumstances potentially engaging the responsibility of the State, that provision entails a duty for the State to ensure, by all means at its disposal, an adequate response – judicial or otherwise – so that the legislative and administrative framework set up to protect the right to life is properly implemented and any breaches of that right are repressed and punished … 23