Fundamental Court Cases for Funamental Rights: A Rain of European Climate Stories in Budapest

Публикувано от:

BlueLink 02-12-2025.

When the Hungarian Constitutional Court annulled key parts of the Climate Protection Act, it did more than require national legislation to comply with constitutional norms for the protection of nature and the climate. The ruling of Hungary’s highest judges on 30 June 2025 signalled a deeper shift in European legal culture: climate inaction is no longer seen merely as weak policy – it may constitute a violation of fundamental human rights.

It is no coincidence that this judicial act became the intellectual and emotional starting point for climate-rights storytelling at the workshop “Fundamental Rights, Climate and the Environment”, also held purposefully in Budapest from 25 to 27 November 2025. The event was part of the STELLAR Rights – Strategic Litigation for Environmental Rights project, jointly organised by the Sofia-based civic think-and-action network BlueLink and the European environmental law association Justice & Environment (J&E).

The workshop brought together in Budapest nearly 40 journalists, editors, communicators, lawyers and environmental defenders from 11 EU member states plus Ukraine. Their shared goal: to explore how the language of fundamental rights increasingly shapes climate and environmental disputes – and how that language can be translated into strong public-interest journalism. “By empowering journalists to tell climate-rights stories, STELLAR strengthens democracy and accountability,” stressed J&E coordinator Csaba Kiss in his opening remarks (pictured below right).

The three-day programme was facilitated by BlueLink’s Executive Editor Pavel Antonov (top left) and Hungary-based climate communicator Réka Nagy (centre). Instead of conventional training, their method built a narrative bridge between courtrooms, university halls, editorial offices, and digital media channels. This year’s Hungarian constitutional case offered a starting point to participants for taking a look at a series of other European cases that outline a new legal geography of climate justice across Europe.

See the opening statement by Stephen Stack, Doctor of Law, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Democracy at Central European University here.

On the workshop’s second day this “bridge” expanded to academia through an applied seminar hosted at Central European University (CEU), in partnership with the Democracy Institute and the Institute for Advanced Study. Their representatives, international environmental law scholar Stephen Stec, and Professor Leerom Medovoi who studies the links between climate crisis, identity and political tensions, helped participants see court cases not only as legal precedents but as symptoms of deeper democratic and cultural transformations across Europe.

(You can read Prof. Lee Medovoy's entire presentation here.)

Good News from Hungary

The Hungarian Constitutional Court’s June 2025 ruling came as a surprise – and, as several participants noted, “good news from an unexpected place”. The 2020 Climate Act had set a target of 40% emissions reduction by 2030 compared to 1990. The Court ruled that this target was constitutionally inadequate: it did not protect the right to a healthy environment and failed to meet the principle of intergenerational justice. The ruling obliges the national Parliament to adopt a more ambitious climate framework by June 2026 – a deadline few expect to be met amid a looming and heated election campaign.

At CEU, Justice Marcel Szabó of the Constitutional Court (pictured above right) explained the reasoning. Rather than adopting a radical judicial doctrine, the Court relied on what he called a “traditional constitutionalism”:

constitutional guarantees for environmental protection and safeguarding future generations;
the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the evolving European climate-rights jurisprudence;
and references to ethical and spiritual sources, including Pope Francis’ encyclical Laudato si’, framing climate protection as a moral duty.

For environmental lawyer Csaba Kiss this combination gives the decision exceptional news value:

“This is traditional constitutional reasoning applied to a non-traditional crisis. The Court is effectively saying: weak climate targets violate citizens’ rights.”

Civil society shares this assessment. Ákos Éger, Executive President of the National Society of Conservationists – Friends of the Earth Hungary (pictured above left), told participants that the new Climate Act must meet European standards:

“We received a constitutional signal that half-measures are not acceptable. The new climate law must place public participation, transparency and access to justice at its core.”

Hungary also has a unique institutional safeguard: the Deputy Ombudsman for Future Generations. Dr. Ilona Agócs reminded participants that the institution was created to represent those who cannot yet speak or claim their rights:

“Our mandate is to defend the interests of the people who will live with the long-term consequences of environmental decline. That alone is a story for journalists.”

A European Rights Lens

The discussions in Budapest quickly moved beyond the Hungarian context. In a video address, the Director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), Sirpa Rautio (pictured above), urged journalists to view climate conflicts through a broader European legal prism. She presented the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as the “EU’s Bill of Rights” – one of the most modern and comprehensive human-rights catalogues. The Charter extends far beyond freedom of expression and information, Rautio said:

“In the Charter you will find many rights directly relevant to journalists, ranging from freedom of assembly and association to the right of access to documents. It also includes rights that are particularly important for your discussions today: for example Article 37, which recognises the need for a high level of environmental protection.”

Investigative journalists, she stressed, play a crucial watchdog role in protecting and promoting fundamental rights. By exposing violations, corruption and negligence linked to environmental policies and practices, they ensure transparency and accountability. But their work increasingly encounters obstacles, including the rise of SLAPPs – strategic lawsuits against public participation – used to silence scrutiny and undermine democratic debate.

The new EU Anti-SLAPP Directive introduces enhanced procedural safeguards to protect freedom of expression and prevent abusive litigation. Integrating these protections into international climate commitments, Rautio said, will be essential to ensure a safe environment in which journalists and activists can expose climate abuses and advocate for urgent rights-based climate action.

From Turów to the Alps and Sofia: Climate Litigation Across Borders

The workshop demonstrated that climate disputes rarely stop at national borders. Václav Prais of Frank Bold in Brno presented the “Turów” case – a Polish lignite mine (pictured above, source: Frank Bold) whose expansion affects Czech and German communities through groundwater depletion and pollution. A lawsuit by Czechia against Poland filed at the Court of Justice of the EU was discussed – the first such environmental dispute between two EU member states.

Vienna-based lawyer Gregor Schamschula of ÖKOBÜRO – Alliance of the Environmental Movement – discussed one of Austria’s most illustrative climate cases: the challenge to long-standing tax exemptions for the aviation sector. Greenpeace and thousands of complainants, supported legally by ÖKOBÜRO, challenged the VAT and kerosene-tax exemptions for international flights as inconsistent with climate goals and unfair to rail transport.

The Austrian Constitutional Court rejected the complaint twice – not because the aviation privileges were climate-friendly, but on formal grounds. This makes the case a classic example of a “legally lost but politically significant” climate lawsuit, Schamschula stressed, as in the end the political debate led to the removal of the privileges. According to him, such cases show how the legal architecture of climate justice evolves gradually – through many battles, some won, some lost.

Bulgaria’s leading environmental lawyer Alexander Kashamov (pictured above right) outlined the link between climate issues and the fight for environmental transparency. In Bulgaria, journalists frequently face refusals of information, pressure and defamation lawsuits when investigating pollution, emissions or controversial infrastructure projects.

“When journalists are attacked for exposing environmental harm, not only freedom of expression is at stake – but the public’s right to know,” said Kashamov, who also serves on Bulgaria’s Media Ethics Committe.

Greek human-rights lawyer Theodoros Alexandridis added a broader continental perspective, presenting case-law from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) which is becoming increasingly more sensitive to the impact that environmental issues and climate related risks might have under Article 2 (right to life). His focus on strategic litigation showed participants how climate arguments reach courts traditionally concerned with rights such as freedom of expression or non-discrimination – reshaping judicial and political dynamics across Europe.

Storytelling at the Intersection of Law and Democracy

Throughout the workshop participants returned to a central question: how do we turn complex legal battles into engaging stories?

Discussions focused on:

finding the human stories behind court decisions;
explaining rights through real-life impacts on people and nature;
editorial responsibility in the “TikTokNews era”.

“Good climate reporting depends on good storytelling – but also on integrity. Trust is your most valuable asset,” said Réka Nagy.

Pavel Antonov added: “If journalists do not translate rights and obligations into accessible language, the democratic process weakens.”

Professor Leerom Medovoi emphasised the intertwining of climate anxiety with fear-mongering and the rise of hate-based political ideologies. He encouraged journalists to explore not only the legal but also the cultural layers of climate conflicts – who feels threatened, who benefits from the status quo, and how propaganda exploits crises to undermine trust in democratic institutions.

Budapest's Climate Agency Director Ada Amon presented lessons learned for environmental urban sustainability in Hungary's capital. She directed attention towards the housing sector where the highest potential is to make city life – otherwise the most polluting – more environmentally and climate friendly.

After the workshop, participants headed back to their home countries to investigate and publish climate-rights stories. In the photo below, participants from Slovenia (left) and Estonia (centre) discuss approaches to engaging storytelling on rights-and-nature cases with facilitator Réka Nagy.

STELLAR Rights: The Project Behind the Stories

The workshop is part of the STELLAR Rights – Strategic Litigation for Environmental Rights project, led by Justice & Environment (J&E) with the participation of the BlueLink Foundation and academic partners such as CEU. The project examines how the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights can be applied to climate and energy policies – and how civil society organisations, lawyers and journalists can use these tools. By connecting journalists, judges, ombudspersons, NGO lawyers and rights experts, STELLAR demonstrates that climate justice requires an informed public. The STELLAR Rights project is funded by the European Union’s CERV – Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme.

Funding and Partnership

This publication is part of the STELLAR Rights project (“Strategic Litigation for Environmental Rights”), funded by the European Union’s Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) programme. The EU is not responsible for the content of this publication.