States’ Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in Relation to ghg Emissions After Duarte Agostinho v Portugal

Abstract Greenhouse gas ( ghg ) emissions drive climate change and the harms it causes. Extraterritorial human rights obligations to curb ghg emissions are difficult to establish in the European Convention on Human Rights because the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) conceptualises jurisdiction as control over rights holders, which is in tension with the diffuse and collective nature of ghg emissions and how they cause climate change. This article first frames the problem and this tension. Second, it outlines the decision in Duarte Agostinho v Portugal to illustrate how the ECtHR emphasised the role of jurisdiction in establishing obligations. Third, it considers justifications for the ECtHR’s decision and argues that the most coherent ones concern the nature of positive obligations and the exhaustion of domestic remedies. Finally, the article argues that the chosen approach means that the echr will contribute little to facilitating climate justice – unless its assumptions are rethought.