The State was recognized Wednesday responsible for failures in the fight against global warming by the administrative court of Paris, a first.

"I do not think in substance that this decision is historic for a good reason", reacted on Europe 1 the lawyer specializing in environmental law Arnaud Gossement.

INTERVIEW

The State was judged on Wednesday "responsible" for failures in the fight against global warming and will have to pay a symbolic euro to environmental associations which had lodged a complaint.

"In line with the commitments that it had made and that it did not respect within the framework of the first carbon budget, the State must be regarded as responsible (...) for part of the ecological damage observed", estimated the judges of the administrative court of Paris.

>> Find Your big evening newspaper in replay and podcast here

Four NGOs, grouped under the banner "The Affair of the Century" (Notre Affaire à tous, Greenpeace France, Nicolas Hulot Foundation and Oxfam France), had indeed taken the matter to court in March 2019. But if the decision was deemed "historic "by these, supported by a petition of more than 2.3 million citizens, things are actually a little more complicated. 

Recognition of "collective responsibility"

Indeed, the judge has recognized a fault of the State in recent years.

Insofar as it did not respect its own objectives in terms of reduction of greenhouse gases, it was condemned for the moral damage caused to the four associations of defense of the environment.

Only the State is not obliged to repair this damage. 

>> ALSO READ

- "Case of the century": Rugy's charge against "purely media associations"

An observation deplored by Arnaud Gossement, lawyer specializing in environmental law: "I do not think in substance that this decision is historic for a good reason. Who, ultimately, is responsible in this case? It is the State . But the State is not a government, a President of the Republic or a Minister. The State is all of us. And I think there is a little misunderstanding. If people think that with this recourse is the individual responsibility of a person who will be engaged, they are wrong. Because it is the collective responsibility which is recognized here by the judge. " 

The second part of the judgment is expected within two months and will consist for the court to determine whether it should oblige the State to put an end to this ecological damage.

At that point, the judge can eventually force him to meet his own climate commitments.