European Court of Human Rights for tightening licensing procedures for fossil fuel extraction

A new precedent in climate accountability – this is how international observers describe the ruling issued last week by the European Court of Human Rights. The case concerned the Norwegian government’s decision to grant licenses for oil exploration in the Barents Sea, but its implications are much broader.

Greenpeace versus Norway

The Court’s verdict is particularly significant as it concludes a years-long legal battle between climate activists and the Norwegian government. It all began in 2016, when the Oslo cabinet granted exploration licenses for oil in parts of the Barents Sea. The decision was challenged by the NGOs Greenpeace Nordic and Nature and Youth (Young Friends of the Earth Norway), joined by six additional climate activists.

According to the plaintiffs, opening the Barents Sea to oil exploration was inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly the right to life and the right to respect for private and family life. The case reached Norwegian courts, but judges in all instances refused to annul the licenses through administrative means.

In 2022, the Greenpeace coalition brought a complaint against Norway before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, where the proceedings continued for three years.

Defeat, but with a triumph

After considering arguments from both sides, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that granting oil exploration licenses in the Barents Sea did not violate the rights of Norwegian citizens. At the same time, the judges emphasized that the administrative process behind the decision had been incomplete and did not include a full assessment of the project’s impact on the climate.

The Court stated that states are obliged to carry out thorough, comprehensive, and science-based evaluations of all potential climate consequences of future oil and gas exploration and extraction projects. This analysis should take into account the total greenhouse gas emissions associated with resource exploitation, including those generated by burning the produced fuels (so-called scope 3 emissions). According to Cathrine Hambro, the lawyer representing Greenpeace, no current extraction project in Norway meets these requirements.

Although the European Court of Human Rights did not uphold the activists’ allegations of human rights violations, its final verdict is seen as an important step toward greater oversight of fossil fuel extraction projects.

European Court of Human Rights sets new standards

Commenting on the ruling, Sigrid Hoddevik Losnegård, chair of Young Friends of the Earth Norway, said: This decision is a huge step forward for climate accountability. The government can no longer continue its oil and gas policy as if climate change did not exist. This judgment will have far-reaching consequences beyond Norway.

In a similar vein, Sébastien Duyck, an attorney for the Centre for International Environmental Law (CIEL), stated: This judgment sets a significant precedent: governments cannot approve projects causing irreversible climate harm without judicial scrutiny, and NGOs and individuals now have stronger legal grounds to challenge fossil fuel projects worldwide.

It is worth recalling that in July 2025, the International Court of Justice in The Hague issued an advisory opinion recognizing that failure to take climate action may constitute a breach of international law. Both rulings pave the way for greater social and legal oversight of government decisions concerning the exploitation of natural resources.

The 2016 licenses concerned exploration only, not extraction. The Norwegian government now faces the task of conducting comprehensive and long-term assessments of the potential climate and environmental impacts of future oil production. Everything indicates that society and non-governmental organizations will be closely monitoring this process.