HRC62 - EU Explanation of Position - Human rights and climate change
UN Human Rights Council
62nd Session – Item 3
L.18/Rev.1 – Explanation of Position
Human rights and climate change
EU Explanation of Position
Mr. President,
I have the honour to speak on behalf of the EU Member States that are members of the Human Rights Council. This explanation of position has been agreed by the EU as a whole.
Climate change and environmental degradation continue to severely affect the full and effective enjoyment of human rights worldwide, with those in vulnerable situations disproportionately affected.
The EU and its Member States are, and will remain firmly committed to addressing the adverse impacts of climate change on the full enjoyment of human rights. As the world’s largest contributor of climate finance, the EU and its Member States remain committed to supporting developing countries and communities that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, in both mitigation and adaptation efforts.
We thank the core group for this initiative on human rights and climate change and acknowledge the 7 rounds of informal consultations. We note the efforts made to revise the text in response to concerns raised. Nevertheless, we believe the resolution will benefit from being shorter and more focused, with a clear focus on its human rights dimension. We will now make some more specific comments.
While we welcome the inclusion of a limited number of our proposals, the majority of our substantive comments remain unaddressed. Among other things, we regret that this resolution missed the opportunity to incorporate language on the transition away from fossil fuels already agreed within the first Global Stocktake of the Paris Agreement and subsequently reconfirmed in the UN General Assembly resolution 80/263 of May 2026, the most recent multilateral expression of the international community’s position on this issue.
We remain concerned that the current draft resolution continues to portray the Paris Agreement as subordinate to the UNFCCC, which is inconsistent with the established legal status of both instruments, being at the same level, and does not reflect the approach taken by the ICJ in its Advisory Opinion on climate change, which recognizes the Paris Agreement as an integral component of the international legal framework governing State’s obligations in respect of climate change.
It is imperative to stress that the concept of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of national circumstances belong to the climate change regime only, and cannot be applied to, or conflated with, human rights obligations. The EU welcomes the ICJ’s authoritative interpretation related to it, according to which the status of developing and developed countries is dynamic. In light thereof, all references in the resolution to CBDR-RC are to be read in the legally most progressive way, namely “in the light of national circumstances” in accordance with the analysis of the Court.
We also note that, despite its thematic focus on climate adaptation, the draft places considerable emphasis on climate finance. While climate finance is an essential component of the global response to climate change, it is not the focus of this Resolution, hence we encourage a more balanced approach that remains aligned with the resolution’s human rights focus. Several provisions on climate finance risk overlapping with the mandates of, and negotiations in, other fora, severely risking undermining the agreement reached therein, which reflect the delicate balance of Parties’ views. The HRC should not serve as a venue to reopen or revisit negotiations already conducted in the competent specialized bodies.
Furthermore, the EU reiterates that technology transfer must remain voluntary and take place on mutually agreed terms. This means that any arrangements relating to technology transfer must be negotiated and concluded in a voluntary manner and that engaging in technology transfer must remain entirely up to the parties holding the technology.
For the next iteration of this resolution, we strongly urge the core group to redirect the focus of this Resolution to its human rights dimension and refrain from reinterpreting or reopening agreed language.
I thank you.