As a 20-week embryo, Choi Hee-woo became one of the world's youngest plaintiffs by joining a landmark climate lawsuit against South Korea.
In late May, South Korea's Constitutional Court held a final hearing of the first case in East Asia to challenge national climate policies.
Hee-woo, now 18 months old, and more than 60 other children await a verdict expected later this year.
So what did your case call into question and what is South Korea's position on its climate action?
What is the climate case for children in South Korea?
South Korea's Constitutional Court heard landmark cases alleging that the government fails to protect the country's people from the harms of climate change.
Four similar climate cases filed between 2020 and 2023 were combined in February for procedural reasons. The first hearing of the joint case took place in April, while the second and last one was on May 21.
The petition involving Hee-woo was called “Woodpecker vs. South Korea,” after his nickname in utero. It was presented by about 200 people, including 62 children, all of them under the age of five.
19 young activists filed another lawsuit in 2020.
The plaintiffs say that without stronger climate action, the government is failing to meet a constitutional obligation to protect people's right to life and a healthy environment.
Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, South Korea also made a legally binding international commitment to prevent average global temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) this century.
Although the verdict date is unclear, a decision is expected later this year, according to Amnesty International.
What climate agreements has South Korea made?
According to South Korea's Carbon Neutrality Law Decree, by 2030 the country must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent compared to 2018 levels, equivalent to a drop of 290 million of tons.
This Nationally Determined Contribution, or NDC, is unique to each country and represents its commitment to reduce global emissions under the 2015 Paris Agreement.
The plaintiffs in the climate case argue that the current target underestimates the amount of emissions South Korea needs to reduce to control global temperature rise.
Additionally, to meet its 2030 goal, the country would have to reduce emissions by 5.4 percent each year starting in 2023, a goal they have so far missed.
Before the cases were merged, three of them questioned the target emissions reduction level set out in the NDC, while the fourth argued that the NDC's implementation plan is inadequate.
South Korea also aims to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
How does this impact climate action in South Korea?
The conclusion of the case comes before the deadline for countries to submit revised targets to reduce emissions.
The next set of goals, reviewed every five years under the Paris Agreement, will be presented in early 2025 and will cover the next 10 years.
If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, South Korea may have to be more ambitious in its next round of climate plans, experts told Nature magazine.
Where is South Korea's climate action?
Currently, South Korea's contribution to emissions reductions, or NDC, is rated as “insufficient” by Climate Action Tracker, an independent scientific project that monitors how governments meet their climate commitments.
In 2022, South Korea got just 5.4 percent of its energy from wind and solar, less than half the global average of 12 percent and far behind neighbors Japan and China, according to the group. Ember energy experts.
Additionally, South Korea is the second largest carbon emitter per person in the G20.
What other important climate cases have young people presented?
Several successful youth-led climate cases have been brought forward over the years.
In 2020, nine people aged 15 to 32 challenged Germany's Federal Climate Protection Act before the Federal Constitutional Court, claiming that the law's emissions reduction targets were still insufficient and violated their human rights.
The following year, the court ruled in their favor and concluded that the country's climate change mitigation plans were inadequate, noting that they could lead to “intergenerational injustice.”
In essence, the court concluded that Germans today are consuming too much of the carbon budget and contributing little to reduction efforts, leaving too great a burden for future generations. The German government responded by bringing forward its timeline to achieve carbon neutrality from 2050 to 2045.
In the United States in 2020, a group of 16 people between the ages of five and 22 sued the state of Montana, arguing that it was failing to protect their right to a clean environment. In 2023, the court ruled in his favor, saying Montana must take climate change into account when approving fossil fuel projects.
Six young people aged between 11 and 24 also filed a lawsuit against 32 European countries in 2023, arguing that climate change threatens their rights to life, privacy and mental health. However, the European Court of Human Rights dismissed his case due to its broad geographical scope.
