Acceso usuarios
Few studies address climate litigation and climate forced mobility together, and the link between climate litigation and internal forced climate displacement remains poorly addressed. This article aims to participate in filling this void. We focus on climate displacement litigation argued before regional human rights courts (the Inter-American Court) and national human rights protection bodies (the Mexican Commission) to determine the adequacy of each from the perspective of potential litigants. We address institutional, procedural and positive law within the context of water scarcity. We find that while institutional and procedural aspects reveal the potential of the Inter-American Court in ruling on climate displacement cases, the application of the positive obligations doctrine by the Mexican National Human Rights Commission is more disaggregated and a priori suitable to ground the course of action of potential litigants.
