Under what conditions can we expect international courts to be progressive? The introduction begins with a discussion of why it is compelling to answer this question by looking at the case of the European Court of Human Rights – a court that is not unambiguously progressive. It then lays out the theoretical and empirical foundations of the book, presenting the key concepts of forbearance and audacity – strategies that courts employ to adjust their sovereignty costs while maintaining a good institutional reputation. The theoretical framework explains why the Court needs to oscillate between forbearance and audacity, and how this oscillation has shaped the norm against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. The empirical analysis, in its turn, combines social science methods and legal analysis to reveal the extent to which the Court has resorted to forbearance and audacity when interpreting the norm against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, and how such episodes influenced the norm’s developmental trajectory. The introduction concludes by explaining the determinants of forbearance and audacity and putting forth the book’s key contributions to the existing debates.

This chapter investigates the current degree of protection granted by German courts for persons displaced in the context of environmental disasters and climate change. The research shows that German courts address the situation of persons displaced in the context of natural disasters when evaluating a ban on deportation according to Art. 3 ECHR. Especially with regards to three countries – Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia – the German courts analysed the effects of natural disasters in a very detailed manner. While not always regarded as a conclusive element on their own, the natural disasters seem to support requests for a ban on deportation. The German cases are examples of how protection might be possible outside the Refugee Convention. They tie in well with the HRC’ Teitiota v. New Zealand decision and show that human rights law can play a significant role. In spite of the lack of a specific legal framework to address persons displaced due to natural disasters and climate change-related harm, we should not ignore the legal instruments that already exist. This chapter attempts to increase the general awareness of Art. 3 ECHR non-refoulement for people displaced due to natural disasters.