Good evening, ladies and
gentlemen, and a very warm welcome to the 2025
Tanner Lecture on Human Values.
The Tanner lectures are now in their 47th year,
and they were established by the American scholar,
industrialist and philanthropist Obert Clark Tanner.
They're held at several leading universities around the globe,
and their purpose is to illuminate the moral and philosophical issues
that shape human life.
In creating the lectureship,
professor Tanner said, I hope these lectures
will contribute to the intellectual and moral life of mankind.
I see them simply as a search for a better
understanding of human behavior and human values.
Appointment as a Tanner lecturer is a recognition of an exceptionally
distinguished and important contribution to the field of human values.
We are deeply honored this evening to welcome Doctor Volker Türk,
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, as our 2025 Tanner lecturer.
Doctor Türk has devoted his career to the advancement
of human dignity and international law.
A native of Austria, he holds a doctorate in international law
from the University of Vienna, and over three decades he has served
in senior roles across the UN system,
notably within the UN Refugee Agency.
Before his appointment in 2022
as High Commissioner for Human Rights,
in his timely lecture this evening,
Human Rights Cooling a Planet on Fire.
Doctor Türk will address one of the most urgent moral imperatives
of our time the intersection of climate change and human rights.
He will explore how our international human rights
framework can indeed must respond
to the global environmental crisis.
Please join me in welcoming Doctor Volker.
Talk.
Well, Mr.
Principal Vice-Chancellor.
Distinguished guests, faculty members, students.
Everyone here in the audience.
I'm really. It's an honor to participate
in this lecture series and important lecture series.
And it's a real pleasure to be with you.
With you here today.
The ten
lectures on Human Values are indeed a beacon of learning,
of intellectual curiosity, of exchange, of diverse views.
It's really everything we treasure about
university education, actually, and we see how much
university education gets sometimes questioned these days.
And it's important to honor this.
And we have, in fact, not found any better place
than a university to debate and to discuss
and to develop ideas and to evolve these ideas.
And indeed, universities are the natural home of creativity,
of dialog that also influences
policymaking and governance.
It is thanks to the research done by universities, including Oxford,
that governments can model climate policy options and their impact,
that we can predict how ice sheets respond to warming.
And we have secured incredible breakthroughs
in renewable energy technology, not least because of that.
Oxford, with its linked courtyards and dreaming spires,
takes us back
to the medieval roots of Western learning
while remaining at the cutting edge of scientific research.
Human values and human rights
have been at the center of Oxford's mission,
and I look forward to our joint project with Oxford
and a number of universities around the world.
In honor of World Environment Day later this week
and the Right Here, Right Now Global
Climate Summit.
Distinguished guests, dear friends.
I felt I've always felt a very deep bond with nature,
and I remember growing up in Austria
with some of my family members being biologists.
And in the 70s, discussions at dinner
table around the impact that even
at that time, the my, my, one of my uncles was saying it
what the implications of burning fossil fuels would mean for the planet.
And to be honest, I remember when I was sort of 15 year old, it
it it did impact have an impact on me.
And and it's it's something that
troubled me
deeply and somehow 50 years later,
the world, some in the world are still in denial
about a fundamental fact our well-being and survival as a species
are inseparable from the health of our planet and our environment.
We are part of nature, and our fate
is inextricably linked with nature.
The very oxygen that we breathe is constantly recycled
between the land, the oceans and the atmosphere.
Our food and water depends on plants
and animals, birds and insects, rivers and seas.
And we have a responsibility
to treat our planet with respect
to protect its glaciers and forests, to support
the diversity of species on land and in the sea,
to keep our rivers and lakes clean,
to preserve nature, including ourselves.
The widespread misconception
that nature is a hierarchy
with Homo sapiens at its apex,
is at the root of the planetary credit crisis
that wreak havoc across the world, and the evidence is everywhere.
Each year, we consume some 1.7 times
more resources than our planet can regenerate.
The extraction and burning of
fossil fuels is trapping humanity in a furnace.
Climate impacts are already hitting every country
with huge human and economic costs.
Almost half of humanity live in climate
hotspots, where people are 15 times more likely
to die of climate related disasters.
According to Oxfam, the world's richest 1%
are responsible for more carbon emissions
than the poorest 6,666%,
meanwhile, our global food systems, which allow massive waste
while millions go hungry, are driving an unprecedented loss of biodiversity.
1 million of the world's estimated 8 million plant and animal species
are threatened with extinction, and by 2050, there could be more plastic
in the ocean than fish, according to some research.
Exposure to pesticides, heavy metals and radioactive waste
are severely impacting people's wellbeing and violating their rights.
Not only have we created a false separation from nature,
we are deluded enough to believe we can make nature bend our will.
Attempts to
subjugate and exploit our fragile ecosystem
have resulted in unpredictable and dangerous consequences,
from disrupting water cycles to remaking landscapes
from forever chemicals to the introduction of invasive species,
there is a long list of attempted solutions that turned out to be problems.
And yet there are powerful forces
working to portray new, untested and risky approaches
to environmental crisis as logical and inevitable.
They are not.
The facts on the climate emergency speak for themselves.
For decades, those most responsible for our
our overheating planet have willfully ignored
and obscured the science, blocked change
and churned out profit with subsidies
in one hand and impunity in the other.
And we are already suffering the consequences.
And without a radical change, of course,
future generations will inherit a far hotter,
more polluted, more unpredictable and more dangerous world.
These same
approaches of supremacy and subjugation
are also causing terrible harm within human societies,
because it's actually nurtured by the very same spirit
white supremacy made of supremacy,
racial supremacy, religious supremacy.
Everywhere we see an attitude that could be summarized
as me first, my community first, my group first.
And I don't care about anyone else.
We enslave, we colonize, we exploit for domination and profit.
And we also see this play out
in the many conflicts
and crisis and the atrocity crimes being committed.
From Myanmar to Ukraine to Sudan to Gaza, with little accountability.
International human rights law and international monitoring law
are blatantly disregarded and more than perhaps in the past.
And we see also corporate interests, profit
from so-called forever wars,
as we see on our screens every day.
Many of the most powerful in our world
are deeply invested in a hierarchy of human lives.
We see this in the skyrocketing levels of inequality within and between countries,
and in a lack of support for economies
that are in or at high risk of debt distress,
many of them disproportionately affected by climate change.
And as a result,
they are not able to invest in education, for example, and and health care.
We see it in a record numbers of people living in
inadequate housing or without shelter.
I'm always struck when I see how many homeless people
you can find in the most richest cities on earth.
We see it in new technologies that are being weaponized
to oppress and marginalized, as we see it in the continued efforts
of fossil fuel companies to undermine solutions to the climate crisis,
to preserve their profits at the cost of our climate and our rights.
We see it in the violations of the rights of indigenous peoples, whose lands
and territories are being exploited and destroyed without their consent.
And we see it in
the culture wars against the fundamental principles
of inclusion, equality and nondiscrimination.
Nature is itself has a long term strategy.
In fact, it doesn't even think about strategies.
But what is ours.
And I would like to share with you four fundamental tenets for this strategy.
First, our strategy needs to embrace
human rights as the compass for a sustainable future.
There's a lot of discussion now on how to frame human rights
precisely at a time of uncertainty
and at a time of instability, because human rights can be that compass,
because our rights call for all people now and in the future
to live in safety, security and opportunity on a healthy planet.
That's if you like the summary of it.
When people have enough to eat, when they have access to clean water
and education,
when their right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is fulfilled.
When people can express their opinions without fear,
when the media can hold power to account,
our societies are more peaceful, more stable and resilient.
Our human rights frame compassionate governance.
It's it's a word we don't hear enough these days.
When you talk about governance, compassion and governance,
the human rights ecosystem has roots that run in all directions
from peace and sustainable development to social cohesion, equality and justice.
And in the 76
years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted,
it has become clear that our rights are also deeply intertwined,
like a natural ecosystem, human
rights find their own equilibrium.
I'm always fascinated by the research that I've seen
about how trees communicate with each other.
They send distress signals about drought and disease
that lead other trees to alter their behavior.
It's absolutely fascinating to see this,
and they share nutrients to keep each other healthy.
So there is an equilibrium there.
And science continues to develop a deeper
understanding of how natural systems connect and communicate.
And we should really find inspiration
for our here for our own societies.
What if humanity's unity
with nature determined our politics?
And what if we recognized that nature has rights to
human rights?
Well, High Commissioner
for Human Rights, but we are talking about the rights of nature.
The rights of certain species
are already widely recognized in many legal systems.
Cruel treatment is illegal.
While there are restrictions on animal testing
and laws to protect wildlife, for example.
What about an ocean? What about a glacier?
What about a tree?
Remember the outcry
when the sycamore sycamore gap tree was cut?
And where in fact, two men were recently found guilty of this crime?
So at some level, old people accept
that a tree has a right to exist and cruel.
So to nature as a whole.
And authorities around the world increasingly recognize aspects
of the right of nature, even at the international level.
The Kunming Montreal Agreement
on Biodiversity, which was adopted in 2022,
acknowledges that the rights of nature are vital to successful implementation.
The United Nations General Assembly has adopted
a series of resolutions on harmony with nature
and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has issued an advisory opinion
stating that environmental components
are legal interests in and of themselves.
Following the
Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand, certain rivers have been granted
legal identity and designated guardians,
and they can be defended in court
against environmental damage.
Likewise, certain mountains and land of significance to indigenous peoples
in various countries have been endowed
with rights of their own.
In South Asia too,
some rivers have specific legal recognition.
Ecuador was the first country
to recognize the rights of nature in its national constitution.
These rights are also recognized at different levels of governance
in Bolivia, India, Spain, Uganda, the United States of America, and beyond.
It is no coincidence that that countries at the forefront
of recognizing the rights of nature have strong and active indigenous peoples.
For many indigenous peoples, the rights of nature
are a given part of their worldview.
Cultural practices, religions, and traditional laws.
They understand that protecting nature
necessarily reinforces human rights,
particularly the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment
rather than viewing themselves apart from nature,
many indigenous peoples view
human beings as part of nature.
As a body.
In this wonderful Maori proverb, I am the river
and the river is me.
Ecuador's Constitutional Court ruled in 2021
that issuing mining permits
that would harm the biodiversity of of the Los
Rios Protected Forest violated the rights of nature.
This ruling prevented continued harm against the forest, while
also protecting the human rights of people in the affected areas.
One of the greatest challenges we face in the world today is developing
models of governance that integrate different worldviews, perspectives,
including those that recognize the rights of nature.
And I invite academics and scholars and researchers
to build on current laws and some of these traditions
and practices,
and to consider what future models of governance
that take into account the long term,
including the rights of future generations, how they could look like,
for example, they could involve constitutional recognition
of legal standing for nature and its defenders,
stronger protection against environmental harm,
and recognition of the crime of ecocide,
including under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
They could mean new and stronger laws, regulations and enforcement mechanisms
to ensure corporations are no longer able to treat our planet
as an inexhaustible resource that is to be exploited.
Businesses
would be held accountable not only for harming people, but for harming nature,
recognizing ultimately that all are
part of the same web of life.
Indeed, we need a society wide conversation
that reimagines the corporate sector.
The goals of the corporate sector, and their responsibilities
to people and planet.
Second,
we need bold action based on human rights to cool our burning planet.
Full implementation of the Paris Agreement is our only hope.
Without it, humanity would be headed
to over four degrees of heating,
which would be, frankly, a death sentence for most.
That figure is now at three degrees on the current trajectory,
so we are making a little bit of progress, but clearly not enough
because the aim, as you know, is 1.5.
This is why support, I think, is growing
for a proposed fossil fuel nonproliferation treaty
that would aim to end the expansion
of the oil, coal and gas projects
and accelerate the transition to renewable energy.
I'm impressed by a number of states that have welcomed this idea,
including Colombia, despite its long history
of use, fossil fuel dependency
where there is political will, even countries
which with much at stake can find a way.
Just look at the more real protocol on B,
which was agreed in 87 to protect the ozone layer.
It's quite a marvel of international lawmaking.
It's in fact regarded as one of our greatest environmental success stories,
and we need to celebrate the achievement and understand why it happened
when it was negotiated.
Critics argued that it would harm economies and people
by restricting chemicals used in reef refrigeration.
Well, today we don't even talk about it anymore.
And the reality was quite the opposite.
Markets did not crash.
The ozone layer is on track for near complete recovery.
And it really has important lessons
for negotiations, including on a global plastics treaty.
And you probably are aware that this global plastics treaty is
being negotiated as we speak.
It also
shows that even though we may not, we may not have all the answers
we need to move forward with this courage, determination and creativity.
And climate action is already spurring
ideas and action to improve lives around the world.
And we really need to build on this.
How can we expand electric transport systems,
green spaces, walkable neighborhoods, and low emission zones?
The capacity for innovation is at an all time high,
and the transition away from fossil fuel dependency
is a laboratory for new ideas.
Renewable energy is already the cheapest power option in most parts of the world.
The cost of electricity from solar power fell
by 85% between 2010 and 2020.
Last year, renewables made up
over 90% of new power
capacity built around the world, and the signals
from almost all G20 countries are clear
they are scaling up the transition to renewables.
But it needs to be fast and it has to be equitable.
Just and just to show about equity.
Only 2% of clean energy investments go to the African continent.
So we need a systemic, systemic shift
to a sustainable economies and societies
because it has wider implications for other economic sectors.
As well.
From training workers to the extraction of critical energy
transition minerals, but also tax policy.
And we must make sure that all these changes from transport to supply
chains to healthcare, to finance, are coherent
and founded in human rights.
Fossil fuel companies and their supporters
are desperate to portray the just transition as unrealistic
and unachievable.
And a new generation of economists, many of them
women economists, are proving them wrong.
My office strongly advocates for a human rights economy,
where all policies, from taxation to climate action,
keep the clear focus on advancing human rights and protecting the planet.
It's this when you want to give a mission to an economic system,
you can also define it from a human rights lens.
For example, in the human rights economy,
states would equitably phase out fossil fuel subsidies
and they would regulate environ mentally destructive activities.
They would invest in renewable energy, sustainable food
systems and social safety nets to help people adapt and adjust.
Investors and businesses would transparency, disclose,
transparently disclose and divest from sectors that are doing
irreparable harm to our climate and to our environment?
Digital technologies can obviously help to turbocharge
the transition to renewables and to sustainability more broadly.
We know about the potential of artificial intelligence tools
can optimize wind and solar power, predict natural disasters, track
pollution, help monitor illegal fishing,
logging and other environmental crimes.
But we have seen the use of AI also for other purposes,
and we need to make sure that the shift to AI is indeed
used for the purposes of being transformative and equitable.
Because while
there is unprecedented
power for good, we have also seen that these technologies
have equally massive potential
to cause harm to societies and to individuals.
And in particular, the concentration
of AI in the hands of a few billionaires is cause for serious concern,
particularly when some have authoritarian
or cultish spiritual aspirations.
The business model of social media platforms is already fueling polarization
and even extremism, including climate denial and dis-information.
Meanwhile, AI data centers and we don't often talk about this.
They suck up massive amounts of energy and water.
And the AI tools are also exacerbating
inequality, existing inequalities and the digital divide.
As you know, there was last September,
the United Nations Pact for the future was was adopted.
It includes an agreement on the need for global guidelines towards
the development of AI, and we really need to see implementation of it.
Quick.
Much faster
than than one could possibly imagine.
It would also help us create a safer and stronger
information ecosystem which respects the right to privacy.
To the extent that this is still possible and protects also
the spaces for exchange and dialog.
Third, we must deliver climate justice.
The countries that.
And really this has to be we need to remember this.
The countries that did least to cause
the climate crisis are paying the highest price.
And it's frankly completely unacceptable.
And some of these countries
are even under an existential threat.
We have seen some progress
in Egypt during the Cop negotiations.
We saw that all countries agreed to an historical loss and damage fund,
but it needs to be adequately funded and implemented.
When the Cop happened in the UAE, in the United Arab Emirates,
countries
agreed to a transition away from all fossil
fuels in a just and equitable manner, leaving no one behind.
Again, it needs to be implemented.
And in Baku last year, developed
and developed countries agreed to triple climate finance
to $300 billion by 2035,
and all parties agreed to work together to increase finance
to developing countries from blood, from public and private sources
to at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035.
Yet we need much more cooperation,
determined determination to implement what was agreed.
And we need all stakeholders to come together.
Of course, governments, the private sector, the investors,
the multilateral development banks, civil society and local communities.
Some projections estimate financial needs of over
$10 trillion per year between 2030 and 2050.
Unfortunately, during the Baku negotiations at the Cop,
human rights were a casualty of the negotiations on finance.
Earlier draft text did recognize the need
to respect, protect and promote and fulfill human rights.
But this language was removed at a very late stage.
This was
not just a missed opportunity, but it's
frankly a continuation of policies
that created today's unsustainable and unequal world.
We need to make those responsible for the climate crisis to pay up.
Climate finance must be accessible to the people that are most affected,
including women, younger people,
children and indigenous peoples.
The states subsidies for fossil fuels,
which amount to hundreds of billions of dollars per year.
Just imagine this.
So we still subsidize fossil fuels with hundreds of billions of dollars.
They need to be redirected towards creating a safer future.
Imagine what the money could do if it invested in sustainable
technologies.
And we need to find new creative sources to fund climate action.
From green bond markets to windfall taxes on fossil fuel companies.
And frankly, a serious reform of the international financial architecture.
And also at the national level, it's both the international and the national.
I fully support
the proposal by the by Brazil's
G20 presidency for a billionaire tax
to go towards reducing inequality and climate finance.
And I hope that South African leadership will continue dialog around this idea.
Many developing economies are on the frontlines of the climate crisis
while they continue,
while they continue to struggle with the fallout of of the Covid pandemic.
We hardly talk about that.
But there has been a fallout, and it's still continuing.
The world Bank reported recently that the 2020
to 2030 that this decade could be a lost decade for development,
with the poorest and least developed countries bearing the brunt.
And we see with the pact for the future
that it tries to address this issue of inequalities
first and foremost through a more representative, multilateral,
multilateral governance and reform of the global financial institutions.
We are within the system, within the United Nations system.
We are very much pushing for these reforms,
but we again need to see it matched by action, where it's
simply not enough when it comes to this particular issue.
And we really need to see commitment
at the forthcoming fourth conference on financing for development later
this month in severe in Spain.
Distinguished guests
the students climate justice is broader than finance.
And there I will add the particular human rights angle to it.
And we need to learn from history.
Inequality and injustice give rise to deep grievances
that can erupt in cycles of violence.
Our current unsustainable economic models
are creating grievances that need to be addressed,
and it is therefore crucial that countries and fossil
fuel companies are held accountable.
And we have seen courts at all levels signaling that states have an obligation
to protect their people from the impact of the climate crisis.
European Court of Human Rights affirmed in a landmark decision last year
that states have enforceable human rights obligations to address climate change.
And in fact, that case was brought and I met.
I met some of the Swiss women who who made this work,
who who brought this case to the to Strasbourg.
And it actually shows people power at work.
National courts around the world are demonstrating greater
willingness to hold those responsible
for climate harm to account.
Last week, interesting decision.
A court in Germany accepted in principle
the link between emitters here in Germany
and damage caused by melting
glaciers in Peru, which, as you can imagine
from all the lawyers in the room, that's quite a stretch.
But the it's an interesting decision that they took
later this year at both the International Court
of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights are expected to issue
keenly and participated advisory
opinions on states human rights obligations around climate change
and, in fact, the Ice, the International Court of Justice case
was sparked by students from the University of the South Pacific
who were deeply concerned by the existential threat that they saw
because of obviously rising sea levels
and the threat it poses to their cultures and to their countries.
And they succeeded in persuading the government of land, water
to bring the issue to the international level.
So, again, people power at work.
The United Nations committees that monitor
compliance with international rights treaties also have a role to play.
Three years ago, one of these committees concluded
that Australia had failed to protect indigenous Torres
Strait Islanders against the adverse impacts of climate change.
And we see in university, in civil society more generally,
that we need to build on these success stories and press for
and press really the legal case for states to act on the climate crisis.
The other element to this is that climate justice also involves
righting past wrongs, healing and reconciliation.
And I come to speak, and that's probably quite unusual to speak
about transitional justice and climate justice.
As you know, transitional justice is a rights based framework.
It was developed,
to help societies move forward
from authoritarianism and conflict.
But I think it also offers some interest, insight
to address the profound injustices that are related to climate.
For example, truth telling encourages
broad and open acknowledgment that harm has been done,
and we need an accurate,
science based account of exactly what the fossil fuel industry
knew about climate change and when and how it kept that knowledge from the public.
That would be a very important truth telling process.
In fact, in transitional justice issues, International Commission of Inquiry
has helped many countries to move from conflict to peace
by investigating serious human
rights violations and abuses and making recommendations for the future.
So the question arises why not, for example,
a commission of inquiry into the climate and environmental crisis?
It could be composed.
It would be composed of scientists, of environmental lawyers, of indigenous
peoples, of representatives, human rights experts, of course.
And it would explain how human action has contributed to climate change,
biodiversity loss and pollution, and where responsibility lies.
Remedy and
reparation are also central to adherence to transitional justice.
And then in the climate context, we know that some damage may be irreversible
and those who are affected are entitled
to compensation and rehabilitation.
Corporate accountability initiatives are essential
to repair such damage and to ensure it is not repeated.
And I welcome the support from the European Union, from Brazil,
Thailand and others for binding regulations to prevent
human rights abuses in the extraction of critical minerals.
The Secretary general last year also
published important recommendations to to ground the revolution
that we need on the renewable front in justice and equity.
It's very similar to this topic.
Above all, transitional justice is centered on the voices
and the needs of the people who have been most affected,
because that's the healing and the listening process.
And these are often the most marginalized people.
And when it comes to our climate, that means indigenous peoples.
It means women and girls.
We know how disproportionately
they are affected by already, by the by the climate crisis.
It means also people with disabilities,
local communities, but also minorities of all kinds.
And there is the rights of young people, of children, of future generations
is a paramount consideration that needs to
be factored into all of this.
We know that they will.
Our children will be most affected by this overheating planet,
and they had no part in any of the decisions that got us here.
There is also an important gender dimension.
As I mentioned before, which calls for women's full participation,
representation and leadership in every stage of the response.
Fourth and final point.
Our strategy requires strong
political leadership and social mobilization.
Many governments are not meeting the urgency of this moment
on climate.
They are out of step with their people.
Recent studies very interesting,
show that 89% of the world's people want stronger action
to fight the climate crisis.
Research also suggests that citizens of rich nations strongly pack
financial support for poorer countries that are on the front lines.
In both cases,
people with these views mistakenly
believe that they are in a minority,
that there is little they can do to change things.
It also shows how politics of distraction works.
When people feel like that.
In other words, disinformation
and divisions are having a deadly impact.
The polarizations in our societies lead precisely
to a lack of political will and action.
So we need to amplify the voices of the silent majority.
We need to join forces to apply maximum pressure
and push political leadership into action
in a world that is torn apart by conflict.
The existential threat of climate change
has fallen off the radar,
and we need to really do everything in our power to put it back at the top.
I remember in 2019, when the climate summit
took place in New York, it was before Covid.
There was a summit.
It preceded the Climate Action Summit with governments
that was only composed of children and of young people.
And it was there pressure in New York that helped put the pressure
on the political leadership to take action.
Unfortunately, I don't see that same mobilization anymore today.
The Brazilian presidency of the Cop
30 has called for a global mobilization.
They call it the material
to build momentum for climate action
locally, nationally, regionally.
We need people everywhere to push for change within their communities
and beyond.
And we see that so many people are already active
across all ages, across all regions.
I'm thinking of people like the marine biologist in the Bahamas, who lost her
home to hurricanes three times and is now
helping to restore mangrove forests.
The mangroves, the public policy research in Egypt
who is empowering young women to pursue careers in renewable energy,
and schoolchildren around the world
who often lead local efforts on climate and the environment.
And I have met many of them,
during out throughout my my years as high commissioner.
So never underestimate your own contribution and influence.
And it's clear
that businesses and universities also around the world need to step up.
It's clear that many governments will not move
without consistent, widespread public pressure.
With science
under attack in several countries around the world
supporting independent climate research within universities
and other centers of excellence is more important than ever.
Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
makes it clear, and I quote, that everyone has the right
to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
And never has this road been more crucial
or at such risk.
Distinguished guests and
and students and friends.
The climate crisis is not just about the weather,
or about renewable energy, or even fossil fuels.
Beyond renewable energy, beyond subsidies, beyond the just transition.
It calls on all of that, all of us, to shape new ways of living.
In fact, it's a clarion call for a new type of politics,
a reinvention of a reimagining of politics and leadership
and, frankly, new approaches to leadership and more honest politics that doesn't
hide behind concepts of me against you,
us against them, humanity against nature.
A fact based politics
that takes science and scientists seriously,
that accepts the realities of climate and environmental related harms
and deals with them effectively and urgently
and more relevant politics
that tackles today's problems
rather than distracting people with culture wars.
A practical politics that recognizes
the inherent contradictions in all of us
without rejection or division at politics.
For the 21st century, that is not based
on outdated concepts from the 19th century.
I found the emotional
outpouring after the death of Pope Francis remarkable
because it reverberated across all faiths.
And it also signaled a thirst for leadership
through compassion, humility and service.
And it shows there is a craving for a new kind of leadership
that is anchored in dignity and not in dehumanization, in dialog,
not conflict in inclusion, not division.
A desire to connect with people,
with nature, to listen and to understand.
And I compare it with the three eyed chameleon.
We need an eye on the past.
We need to learn from history.
We need an eye on the present to act with reason and compassion.
And we need an eye on the future
and our responsibilities to our children and future generations.
In short, we need governance that is guided
by the fundamental values and principles that unite us all.
Governance that truly serves all its people
and reflects their hopes and aspirations.
Governance that tackles the difficult long term problems
for the benefit of all, and not just the short term electoral cycles.
And I challenge everyone and everyone who is listening to think about how
we can, how you can, how we can all contribute to a new era of politics.
We need a global movement for change,
founded on human rights and human dignity,
and to transform our governance for the common good
and built, as a result, a much more
sustainable future for all life on our planet.
Thank you very much.
Doctor.
Thank you for that really insightful lecture.
And I know immediately I can hear from the noises behind me
as I was listening to your talk, that you have raised
a number of issues there, which really, deeply chimed with our audience.
I'm sure there are many people who would like to ask questions.
What I propose is that we might take 2 or 3 questions to begin with,
and then get you to respond to them as a group if, if that, if that's okay.
So colleagues who would like to kick off.
Good.
Come to an old hand here at the front, Colin Tudge. Hey.
Thank you for a very fun lecture.
But how do we deal with the fact that in a free election in America,
the American people overwhelmingly elected a guy
who is totally against more or less everything you said of this country.
We are quite likely to elect Nigel Farage,
who is a sort of scion of, Trump.
How do we deal with this fact?
I mean, I take your point that most people are in favor of the kind of things
you're saying, but that's not as what's actually reflected
in the political mood.
Okay.
Thank you.
Question at the back there.
Thank you for your time, High Commissioner.
You alluded over the course of your, talk
about the inequity as it pertains to responsibility for the climate crisis.
And you have, I think, of countries like Brazil, for example,
which are responsible for stewardship of the Amazon rainforest.
As well as African countries that are heavily
dependent on coal and other, you know, nonrenewable sources of energy
who are being told to shift to renewable sources of energy.
And some of the pushback that you see from these countries
is that they feel as if they're being told what to do by very powerful,
wealthy resource nations without necessarily being given
the resources to actually embark on that energy transition.
So could you please explain what policies are currently being implemented
or can be implemented to allow for this transition, without it feeling
as if it's being imposed by more powerful nations
who do have a larger share of the responsibility for the climate crisis.
Thank you.
A great question, and I'll take one.
One final question before we we have our first opportunity to respond.
Thank you.
Thank you for the excellent talk.
I know you have a background in refugee rights,
and you didn't speak too much in the talk about that,
likelihood for the climate crisis to exacerbate
existing issues we have with regards to refugee flows and refugee rights.
So I'd like to, invite you maybe to speak a bit about your views on, on this topic.
Thanks.
Take point.
Okay.
Well, let's take one more, and then perhaps we
come to back to you.
So one more question.
So we have a question here in.
Thank you very much.
You know, in the most government, the use the benefit cost
analysis to do the policy making and how to deal with
we monetize the human right when we do the business.
Sorry, the benefit
cost analysis, which means sometimes we need to monetize the human right.
See, what is the price for human life?
What is the price for the freedom of human?
Do you think that is immoral to do that?
Analysis? Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you.
Right.
I'll leave you to his competitors. Okay.
Look, I, I, I think the most important thing
is to get people into politics again.
I think people have shied away from it for, for, for for much too long.
I also see that people who go into politics
these days are no longer those
who actually have this common
good in mind, or if you like, the what is the public good?
In fact, we hardly have discussions anymore about public or common goods,
and it's sort of has left
the theater to people
of the economic and political elite who seek leadership positions,
who are far removed from the actual realities of most
of most people around the world, which is why we have seen some of these
very deep grievances that that people have, and why you see also,
increasingly social movements and protest movements
in many countries around the world that actually want some change.
The problem is, how do you translate this into politics?
I don't think that the people in the US voted for cruelty.
I don't believe that people vote for
excluding, dividing and and scapegoating.
I think they are in some ways misled.
There is huge politics of distraction.
I think we see it also.
It's not just the US, it's in Europe as well.
It's in many other parts of the world too.
It's just I wish that education would bring forward.
As I said, this,
what politics
means in the 21st century, because we are unfortunately caught up
in these short term electoral cycles and for the long term issues, which is
why you had international law, because international law always guaranteed
the commitment to addressing long term issues,
which is why some of them are trying to dismantle international law.
But we can't the world can't afford this because it's it's
the counterweight to the short term electoral cycles.
And I just I really wish and which is what I said, that
there was more realization about countering
what otherwise would become
quite a dystopian political culture.
And there are ways and as I said, the statistics bear it out.
People do care about the climate.
They do care about the other.
They they don't want to fall back into these
old fashioned
thinking, but they are fed with.
Unfortunately, the algorithms don't help on the social media side.
So there is a huge responsibility on platforms for for social media as well.
And, you know, I'm always worried when I see that
content moderation gets thrown into the freedom of expression debate
without any understanding that human rights law itself does not allow,
hate speech and incitement to violence,
and harmful disinformation to flourish.
So I can only hope.
And I think in academia you play a very important role
also to build up a future
genre of leaders who who will take up
precisely that reimagining of politics in the 21st century.
So that because all of what I see today is old fashioned, it's 19th century,
it's it's going back backwards enormously, and it's not the future.
And, and I think they also want us to feel powerless.
But we are not powerless.
We have a lot of power.
And frankly, I see this in in so many social movements around the world
who are often not, you know,
and we had a discussion with some academics earlier today where
sometimes the problem of social movement, how are you connected then with politics?
That's still a gap that we haven't really figured out how it best works.
I mean, look back at the Arab Spring and what happened to the countries afterwards.
So how do you translate political politics
into the 21st century and build
on what is fundamentally
human and brings people together at the, at the,
at the fundamentally human level, and we really need to reinvent it.
And I think it's a challenge for all of us.
I don't have all the answers.
How you can reinvent politics,
but I think we need to see it as as part of the solution.
Look, un, I
mean, you know, in the climate negotiations,
there was I mean, the lawyers, of course, know this very well.
There was this concept of common but differentiated responsibilities
that was, frankly, a compromise formula,
precisely because of the fundamental responsibility issue.
I mean,
the richness, the richness of that, the, the you know, the fact
that so many countries became very rich,
not least because of the fossil fuel,
exhaustion was also because,
it was built essentially
on a much smaller portion
of the world than and the others did not necessarily benefit from the same.
And as a result, they ended up in, in a, in a much different situation.
The one thing to compensate is through financing.
And that's why these financing negotiations
in the cops are so complex and so difficult.
But it does mean what I mentioned in my speech,
that there needs to be massive infusion of climate financing precisely
to achieve the transition to renewable new renewables
and, and to a greener and and also more social future.
Because the issue was always
how do you marry a green transition with a social transition.
But it is possible.
I mean, Ireland has done a lot of work on this,
and it's just the political will again that that needs to to do that.
On refugee migration, I mean,
as you know, when we do the
when you, when you undertake climate modeling, you will see
even in the next ten years how certain parts Somalia, Sahel,
for example, or Central America will, because of droughts
and extremely high temperatures will become uninhabitable.
Currently you have people living there, but even within ten years
it will probably be almost impossible to live there.
So it will trigger
migration.
That migration will be in large parts internal,
so it will affect countries in a massive way because you will see
more and more, and it's probably not sudden.
It's more slow onset.
I mean, it's it's because these are slow onset of disasters if you like.
And they will trigger more and more migration.
And we are seeing it already today.
And if it's not addressed through
creating opportunities, integration and all kinds of other things.
Yes it is, it is potential because you come to the issue
of competition over land and resources.
So it could trigger more conflicts if one isn't careful about it.
So there is absolutely a link, and I think some of you are
have been doing a lot of studies on this very important topic.
Look, human rights is
if you define it in terms of interests
and maybe the, the easiest example is to say that business
and human rights have come together more over the last couple of years.
Our guiding principles and business and human rights.
And it is not because suddenly everyone wants to be a human rights champion.
It's because they see the it in their own interest that
if they apply a human rights lens, it actually is better for their own business.
I mean, consumers, the consumers of the future
and the employees of the future do care about.
I mean, among young people, we know that they do care about human rights issues.
So for anyone who has any business interest,
they would look out for future employees and future
and future consumers, and they would want to see that
they respect in their supply chains, that they have human rights due
diligence policies, and that they have risk frameworks applied
that actually make them,
convince their consumers that they are doing the right thing.
And that's incredible power on all of us, by the way, because the consumers
have a lot of power because they decide where they spend their money.
And we know that there has been if you
look back at the last couple of decades, so much more awareness and consciousness
about what we consume, where we consume it,
who is, giving us the products and so forth.
And that actually is a huge power.
So it is in the interests of business to do the right thing
and to base their decisions
and their vision on human rights.
So it's an interest issue rather than monitor now.
So if you want to make profit in the future, you embrace human rights.
High Commissioner, you spoke in your speech
about the importance of young people to, your agenda.
And I'm very pleased to say that we have here in the audience today,
a number of, pupils from local schools.
And I'd like to invite them to,
ask a question.
Is there anybody from, I believe we've got pupils here from Chilwell
and Swan from either of these schools who would specifically like to ask?
Good question.
Very well.
Constituency.
Well, perhaps once we are letting them get.
Do you think the movements like the Extinction Rebellion
and just to spoil are more helpful or like more of a hindrance?
Like, do you think it looks kind of immature to
the people in charge, or do you think it's raising needed awareness?
The for the,
things like Extinction Rebellion?
And just
peaceful.
But I, I can only say to you that,
I was impressed
when I met children who came to New York.
I mean, you know, greater to me, of course, was the very strong,
symbol for this.
But there were many, many children around the world
who demonstrated on Fridays for future.
They they talked to their parents.
They they they they mobilized for for what they cared about.
And and it's children and young people.
And I can tell you it has huge influence on politics.
Never underestimate your power.
So, yes,
if you.
Should I maybe stay here or do.
This?
Well, do we have any further questions?
I think maybe we'll have one more round.
Okay, Commissioner, if you're happy and then,
So, Dylan, could you.
Thank you for your talk again.
Picking up on the question asked a little earlier.
I'm from Pakistan myself, and in countries like that,
only recently there was an election, and the party
elected was not the one that was voted for by the public.
The person that was actually voted for is now in prison.
And he was more prone to helping causes like climate change and working for them.
So in countries like that, where there
at the same time, there are people who are dying of heat strokes,
where temperatures are hitting at least 50°C in the summers.
What can the UN do to help nations like that,
when even voting for the right party doesn't do anything?
Thank you. Thank you.
So the question.
This is not
directly related to the theme of your lecture,
but on the 1:00 news on the BBC,
they reported the recent speech that you made
in which you said that Israel is guilty of serious,
number of war crimes.
And could you elaborate on that?
And more specifically, do you think Israel is guilty of ecocide,
the destruction of the,
environment?
And secondly, whether Israel is guilty of genocide,
the crime of all crimes?
Thank you.
I wanted to follow up on the question that Nick asks people to ask questions
from young people, which is sort of the converse,
which is what can adult
human rights activists or educators do to help young
people's voices be taken into account in the formal systems of the UN?
Thank you.
Okay.
To take one more question.
With the High Commissioner to respond.
United Nations consists of governments.
But when a conflict like Ukraine
under the P5, Russia is involved.
But the people that you want to solve,
in case obviously leave us is very much behind.
And yes, when there was a P5 bit difficult
to solve and more and more that the issues
which the government cannot do are in a worse position to deal with.
And you and these consisting of the governments.
And there are some ways in which what
direct people's lives could be,
used to change various conflicts.
United peoples who are united individuals
rather than united government.
Thank you.
Thank you, thank.
Perhaps
before I, I just want to clarify one thing,
because also, I think as educators, as I understand the question
when it comes to the involvement of young people and in the UN processes,
we actually have a whole outreach to young people.
And we have, in fact created an office
for for youth, a UN office for youth.
And I think the education side is absolutely critical.
And I just want to clarify one thing.
When it comes to activism,
it is also important that activism does it does not become
disrespectful of the law or or not.
I mean, we need peaceful activism.
It's not about activism that preaches the law or preaches peace or so forth.
And I think that's also important, that there are ways and means to engage and to,
to actually be part of a social movement
that is respectful of, of the law.
And I think we have also seen in some instances, unfortunately, the,
the areas where indeed that needs to be addressed.
So there and I think it is also upon the state to provide the opportunities
to not only be able to listen and involve young people
not as tokenism, but as as a meaningful participation.
And I think that is also very important, because if young people do not feel
that they are listened to, if they don't feel that they are heard,
it does create a problem.
And it creates precisely the type of tensions that we then see.
So it is it needs to be thought through very,
very well how you bring in children and young people.
And we have actually
in our processes in Geneva, we have worked quite a bit on this.
We, we work,
to bring in children, for instance, in,
in some of the considerations of the Committee
on the rights of the child, but also the Human Rights Council,
and it's it requires a lot of preparation
because we don't want it to become purely tokenism.
It has to be meaningful,
and your voice needs to be heard and needs to be, taken into account.
And, and there
we actually had a youth declaration in the context of the pact for the future.
So we need to find these avenues so that the lead to something
that is constructive and helpful.
Look, Pakistan, of course, is a country
that is indeed one of the climate hotspots in the world.
I remember the very difficult issue
when you have the extremely high temperatures,
but then you have the flooding and you have been affected.
I mean, the country has been affected by flooding on many occasions.
The UN's response in-country is obviously the humanitarian response
to support the people when it comes to providing disaster relief and
and all kinds of, well, even financed financial relief for,
for people who are directly affected by it.
On the human rights
front, we will always whenever there are human rights issues,
we obviously take them up with the government, with the authorities.
But I cannot say that
this will immediately lead to a change because we are not
we don't have that power.
We only have the power to influence and to find ways and means to, to,
to deal with, you know, especially serious human
rights violations when it comes to journalists.
Human rights defenders
and, and people within the civic space
on, on Israel, Gaza.
I mean, I, I think if my statements have been absolutely clear
over the last couple of 20 months or so, both at the beginning
on the 7th of October, where I was absolutely clear about,
the absolute condemnation of what Hamas did,
the trauma that it has caused in the country.
But also my clear words
when it comes to the conduct of warfare by Israel,
and the many issues that, that,
that unfortunately, there's that conflict is brought to bear.
And I only hope that in this current
situation, that reason will prevail and that there will be a ceasefire,
there will be a release of all the hostages
and that there will be massive, massive humanitarian aid coming in,
because then, frankly, that's the one thing that at the moment
worries us the most, because the situation is,
is absolutely disastrous for for the Palestinians in Gaza,
for the civilians who suffer on a daily basis in an abominable way.
And this needs to be addressed.
There's absolutely no doubt about that.
And the UN is ready to do this if we are allowed to.
And that is part of the problem.
We're not allowed to do it
in the way that we should.
Un governance and I mean, you, I mean the Security Council and so forth.
I mean, the Security Council is what the Security Council is.
I mean, it it has been mostly dysfunctional
when it comes to the big crisis because of P-5 power politics
and the geopolitical tensions that we see,
there are still decisions that they're able to take on situations
that are not necessarily in the limelight for, for example, Haiti,
but the problem again, was,
you know, the arms embargo was not implemented
or not implemented sufficiently, which is why you have all these gangs,
still getting guns and armament.
You don't have enough sanctions against the people who are behind the gangs,
despite the fact that you have a security Council resolution on this.
So I think we we need to move to a world where international law
is put again, on a much higher level and respected
as such, including the institutions that defend them.
And that includes not only the United Nations agencies,
including my office, but it also includes the International Court of Justice
and the International Criminal Court.
And I have some and the European Court of Human Rights for the for Europeans.
I have sometimes seen statements
that are not only disrespectful of the international institutions, but
also very manipulative because they say things that are simply not true.
And we going back into this,
you know, lying has we need to make,
lying wrong again,
basically, because that I think is, is very important
because sometimes it seems to be done in different ways.
But we make we need to make lying wrong again. Yes.
Okay.
Thank you.
So, ladies and gentlemen, I'm afraid the time has flown by.
And, I'm, speaker this evening
has more than definitely earned his supper.
And given the chef will be pacing up and down
and Linacre College expecting us there very shortly.
We should draw these proceedings to a close, but I'd like to thank,
first of all, our lecturer, this evening for giving an outstanding Lineker
Tanner lecture, both inspiring and insightful.
And I took particularly to heart.
You call to us here in the University,
not only with that research agenda that you laid out very clearly for us,
but also for our need to communicate and to educate better.
So thank you for that, and I hope you will join me once again
in thanking our 2025 Tanner lecturer, Doctor Villopoto.