Abstract

The study examines the emerging convergence between climate change litigation and human rights jurisprudence, with a particular focus on its relevance and potential application within the Indian legal framework. Climate change has traditionally been addressed through environmental regulatory mechanisms but now exists as a human rights issue that affects fundamental rights which include the right to life health equality and dignity. The paper uses doctrinal and comparative legal research methods to study important court cases which include Urgenda Foundation v. Netherlands Asghar Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan and Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell alongside international human rights instruments and evolving global norms. The research shows how courts from different jurisdictions have moved away from project-specific environmental claims to enforceable structural rights-based methods which create mandatory requirements for both states and certain businesses. The study shows that Indian courts use their doctrinal authority to handle climate issues as human rights violations through their broad application of Article 21 and public trust doctrine. The study shows how Indian judges now recognize the relationship between climate change and human rights through their recent judicial decisions. The paper examines the judicial potential for transformative change while showing how justifiability and separation of powers together with enforcement constraints and institutional limits create obstacles to this process. The study proposes calibrated judicial strategies which include scientific benchmarks together with structural remedies and institutional monitoring mechanisms to establish effective and legitimate climate governance. The study demonstrates that a human rights-based climate litigation approach provides India with a strong constitutional foundation for climate justice who protects both institutional equilibrium and democratic authority.

Keywords