South Korean Babies Suing the Government and Its Implications for the World
Jia, wearing green, in 2022 when a case was filed challenging South Korea’s climate plans (via Financial Times/Chung Taekyong).
By Eunice Lee ‘27
In March 2020, a 20-week-old fetus nicknamed “Woodpecker” filed a lawsuit against the South Korean government for its inadequate action to mitigate climate change. This unborn child’s parents filed the case on his behalf, alongside the parents of 62 children under the age of five.
The lawsuit precedes the first of four cases, filed by 19 campaign group members of Youth 4 Climate Action, a South Korean youth-led environmental advocacy group. In this preceding case, the members contended that the South Korean government’s climate targets were insufficient and that the detrimental impacts of climate change on their future lives violated their constitutional rights to life and the pursuit of happiness. The case targeted the 2010 law Framework Act on Low Carbon, Green Growth, which was designed to promote sustainable development. The plaintiffs pointed out weak reduction targets and brought forth evidence of risks of extreme weather, rising sea levels, and food shortages as proof of the government’s failure to protect the environment and public welfare. This lawsuit made history in East Asia by challenging national climate policies and stands as a beacon of hope for Korean citizens. The plaintiffs aspire for it to follow in the footsteps of the landmark lawsuit Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands, in which a Dutch environmental group and 900 Dutch citizens successfully compelled the government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The Korean government has previously announced plans to be carbon neutral by 2050 and strengthened the nationally determined contribution under the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by 2030. During the final public arguments in May 2024, the government defended its 40 percent reduction target, particularly emphasizing conflicts with Korea’s economic sectors that rely on manufacturing such as steel and petrochemicals. It claimed that the 40 percent reduction was both realistic and progressive. However, Youth 4 Climate Action highlighted the government’s lack of accountability measures and failure to provide reduction targets for years after 2030. In addition, they pointed out the failure to meet international climate obligations in the UN Paris Agreement, which seeks to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. South Korea’s aim to lower the country’s greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 2018 levels by 2030 does, in fact, not meet the Paris Agreement’s ambitions. According to the Climate Action Tracker, if all countries mimicked South Korea’s reduction targets, the world would reach 3 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. These governmental failures to provide its citizens with protection from the disasters of climate change persuaded the plaintiffs to fight to safeguard their rights.
The second lawsuit echoes the arguments of the first case but extends the implications to future generations. Since 2019, many young plaintiffs, including children, infants, and unborn babies, have filed multiple climate lawsuits. These cases include the Youth Climate Lawsuit (2020), Citizens’ Climate Lawsuit (2021), Baby Climate Lawsuit (2022), and Constitutional Petition for the Carbon Neutrality Basic Plan (2023). The premise for all of these cases was that the government failed to take citizens’ concerns on climate change seriously and therefore infringed on fundamental constitutional rights to happiness, a healthy environment, equality, and protection from disasters.
The third case was brought by 123 members of civil society organizations, political party leaders, and citizens personally affected by climate change. The fourth case is led by 51 South Korean nationals and hones in on Korea’s carbon neutrality plan, which was published in 2023. These plaintiffs argue that the plan fails to measure emissions reductions properly before 2030. Plaintiffs from all four cases use the Climate Action Tracker as evidence for their claims. The tracker rated South Korea’s government action as “highly insufficient” and criticized its dependency on emissions from the energy sector, including fossil fuels. The plaintiffs also submitted evidence from the 2022 National Human Rights Commission of Korea, which stated that the government had a “fundamental obligation” to protect human rights from the climate crisis and must showcase active steps to address them.
Parents of these children often speak about how their children will be nearing adulthood by 2030 and how they fear the hostile environment that their children will be forced to spend the rest of their lives navigating. Photos blasted on social media include photos of young children standing next to their parents during a protest with signs that say, “Change the world, not the climate!” Young children have spoken out for themselves, attempting to use the power of their voices to account for their inability to vote. During hearings, a 12-year-old plaintiff named Jeah Han described how climate disasters were affecting her life. She spoke about the rain that flooded her house and her fears of landslides in her town. Han said, “It is not fair to place the entire burden of solving such a tremendous problem on future generations. If the future gets worse, we might have to give up everything we dream of.”
The legal teams for all four cases have been collaborating to acknowledge the overlaps among the claims. In total, about 200 South Koreans are suing the government, urging for stronger climate goals. Ultimately, these cases hold implications at a larger scale. Does the South Korean government hold the social responsibility and political will to balance economic interests with long-term climate change legislation? Future generations’ vulnerability to the ongoing impacts of climate inaction clashes with the structural frameworks and political priorities of the country. These South Korean lawsuits join other landmark cases of climate change and may possibly inspire a wave of similar efforts to set new policies that benchmark regions beyond East Asia.