Man loses Climate Change Refugee Plea

I thought this might be of interest. Is this a sign of the times??

"A Pacific islander whose homeland is threatened by rising seas failed in an attempt to become the world's first climate change refugee, with a New Zealand judge dismissing his case as "novel'' but "unconvincing''."

Lawyers for Ioane Teitiota, 37, argued that New Zealand should not deport him even though his visa had expired, because climate change was gradually destroying his low-lying home in Kiribati. The difficulties Teitiota and his family would face in the tiny nation - which consists of about 30 atolls, most only a few metres above sea level - meant they should be recognised as refugees, the lawyers said. In a written ruling handed down on Tuesday, High Court judge John Priestley acknowledged that Kiribati was suffering environmental degradation attributable to climate change, including storm surges, flooding and water contamination.

Here's a foto:

resources1.news.com.au...

"But he (Judge John Priestley) said millions of other people in low-lying countries were in a similar situation and Mr Teitiota did not qualify as a refugee under international law."

Here's the full story:

www.news.com.au...< br />


As time goes on I can't help wondering whether or not this situation is going to become more commonplace.

The judge really had no choice but to rule that way. If he had granted refugee status then that would open the flood gates to millions claiming the same. By not granting, at least for the time being it will keep things in check.

People the world over are looking to countries that are prosperous to relocate to in hopes of having a better life. Many have no skills to offer or formal education so they end up just changing the scenery but not getting what they thought they would.

reply to post by pstrron


Yeah I agree but are we going to see a new trend in people living in these low-lying areas trying to claim refugee status due to the ocean levels rising? If public outcry is great, what are the repercussions on both the victim countries and 'saviors'?

reply to post by pandersway

are we going to see a new trend in people living in these low-lying areas trying to claim refugee status due to the ocean levels rising?

This the reason I feel that the judge declined the status. If the claim had been granted there would be a flood of people exploiting the "climate change" refugee status before there is even a problem. This is not to mean that the world should turn a blind eye to the rise in sea levels but it does mean that once it becomes a real threat such status should be granted.

reply to post by pandersway


EXCELLENT find. ...Guess the judge did not want to set a legal precedent. What if the millions who already need to relocate start leaving their homes en masse? Where can they go?

reply to post by pandersway


This guy isn't from the Philippines, but the story reminds me of ATS members who blame Filipinos for not relocating and finding new homes before disaster strikes. ...Should we punish people for being born where they were?

reply to post by pstrron

...If the claim had been granted there would be a flood of people exploiting the "climate change" refugee status before there is even a problem.

There already IS a "problem." Philippines: way more than 10,000 dead - bodies piled in heaps