There are obvious parallels between the climate crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. As journalist Emily Atkin puts it, “Both are global crises which threaten millions of lives with clear science on how to solve them which governments have been too slow to act on; the same people who promote climate denial are refusing to accept the science of coronavirus, too.”
But if the science is clear, why is it that so many governments aren’t listening to it? Well, corporate propaganda campaigns are largely to blame. These campaigns span everything from spreading climate denial to derailing chemical regulations, all by discrediting science to preserve business as usual. CIEL, among others, has been at the forefront of uncovering fossil fuel companies’ campaign to sow doubt on climate change and prevent ambitious climate policy — despite knowing about the dangers of climate change since the 1950s. This undue corporate interference in policymaking undermines a broad range of human rights, including substantive rights, harmed by the consequences of weakened policies, and political rights, as meaningful and informed participation becomes more and more difficult.
While the United Nations Human Rights Treaty Bodies, the monitoring bodies attached to every major human rights treaty, are increasingly engaging on issues related to the human rights implications of climate change, they have yet to address the clear role of corporate propaganda campaigns. However, this might soon change. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights — a legally binding instrument ratified by 170 countries — includes the right to “enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications,” and the treaty body on this covenant, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), has recently published a so-called “General Comment” clarifying the details of this right. The document contains references throughout that climate activists can leverage to strengthen their demand that governments must “listen to the science.”
First of all, the General Comment establishes that states have an obligation to “adopt mechanisms aimed at aligning government policies and programs to the best available, generally accepted scientific evidence.” This particular obligation is even included in the list of “core obligations,” which states must immediately fulfill. In short, states are obligated to take the climate crisis into account when designing policies in all sectors. From energy, to transportation, to agriculture, to post-COVID-19 stimulus packages, policies need to advance the transition away from fossil fuels to be aligned with the best available science, and thus comply with states’ human rights obligations. Building new coal-fired power plants, granting licenses for oil extraction, and blindly bailing out airline companies clearly do not align with this obligation.
Also on the list of core obligations is the duty to “promote accurate scientific information and refrain from disinformation, disparagement, or deliberate misinforming of the public, so as to erode citizen understanding and respect for science and scientific research.” The CESCR links this to the private sector as well, making clear that states must “ensure that private actors do not disseminate false or misleading scientific information” and “ensure that private investment in scientific institutions is not used to unduly influence the orientation of research or to restrict the scientific freedom of researchers.” In other words, remember those corporate propaganda campaigns mentioned earlier? States need to prevent these from happening.
States also need to “ensure that people have access to basic education and skills necessary for the comprehension and application of scientific knowledge” and to “promote accurate scientific information,” including about climate change. So in addition to preventing corporations from spreading false or misleading information, states also need to proactively ensure that people have access to scientific knowledge, which could include a broad range of measures from education policies to information campaigns.
The ongoing pandemic is a stark reminder of how important science-based policies are, and the CESCR’s new General Comment is a useful tool to remind governments of their obligations to prioritize them. It’s time for human rights institutions to build on this foundation and guide states on their obligations to protect policymaking from undue interference by corporate actors — whether the policies are aimed at COVID-19 recovery, or tackling the climate crisis.
By Lisa Kadel, Legal Intern, Geneva
Originally posted on July 29, 2020