A court in the Hague has ruled in favour of Greenpeace in their landmark legal battle against the Dutch state, declaring that the Netherlands has acted unlawfully by failing to adequately reduce nitrogen (N) emissions in line with statutory targets set for 2025 and 2030.
In the ruling, the court found The Netherlands in breach of the European Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive, which mandates EU member states to maintain biodiversity in Natura 2000 sites, which are designated zones of protection covering Europe’s most threatened habitats.
Greenpeace argued that the Dutch state has done little to counter its N surplus which has contributed to the rapid decline of the protected flora and fauna contained within its 162 natura 2000 sites.
While the state denied that it had acted unlawfully or negligently, the court found the Dutch government culpable for the deterioration taking place within the protected nature zones and therefore deemed the Dutch state in violation of European legislation.
In the final verdict issued recently, the court ordered the Dutch government to comply with its 2030 N targets, which requires 50% of the country’s nature reserves to hold N deposition levels deemed tolerable to the ecosystems in place.
If the government fails to achieve this legally bound target before December 31, 2030, it must forfeit a penalty of €10 million. To date, the Dutch state has only reduced N emissions to the required levels in 28% of the reserves, the court found.
The court also ruled that The Netherlands must act immediately to reduce the country’s N emissions in line with the timeframe required to achieve the 2030 targets, due to the urgent nature of the environmental interests at stake.
The court criticised the track record of previous governments in tackling N emissions as well as the current government’s decision to revert back on the Transition Fund, which has greatly reduced the financial scope required to sustainably reduce nitrogen.
Court judgement
The judgement is expected to have significant ramification on the Dutch agriculture industry, particularly the livestock sector, which is considered to be the largest source of nitrogen in the country.
According to documents presented to the state, two-thirds of the N evident in Natura 2000 areas originated from The Netherlands.
Of that percentage, 76% was derived from agriculture, 16% from transport, 5% from households and 3% from industry.
According to scientists, excess nitorgen in the atmosphere has been found to be detrimental to ecosystems due to its capacity to mix with precipitation, which in turn creates acidification within soils, chemically disrupting the fine balance of nutrients.
As a result, the soil declines in quality, infringing on the level of biodiversity it can support.
Speaking after the victory, a spokesperson for Greenpeace said:
“This lawsuit is really a last resort to force the government to adhere to its own laws and to prevent the most vulnerable nature from deteriorating even further or from collapsing permanently.
“Through the nitrogen case we have forced the Dutch government to protect nature and to help farmers in the transition to sustainable agriculture. The verdict in this lawsuit can change everything. It can be the beginning of a better future – for nature, and therefore for all of us.”
