Legal

The debate over genome editing has appeared before, but recently regained attention due to the discovery and rapid advancements in the CRISPR technology, which makes it possible to correct faulty genes and errors in DNA with relative ease. This technology primarily allows the detection and elimination of dangerous genetic diseases, but many scientists call this opportunity a “slippery slope” towards controversial “enhancement” purposes. We are now at a stage when safety is one of the primary concerns, namely because of the possibility for errors (such as mosaicism or off-target effects). The question is whether to wait with clinical use until better precision is reached. Another concern is justice and equity, as new technologies within gene editing might lead to larger gaps in accessible healthcare, even resulting in a dystopian scenario where classes are defined by the quality of their “engineered genome”. Needless to say, gene editing is controversial for both ethical and religious reasons and guidelines need to be set, taking into consideration the diverse attitudes.

Climate litigation refers to the use of legal action to address issues related to climate change. The aim of these legal actions is to hold individuals (international corporations, governments, industries) accountable for contributing to climate change and enforce agreements to reduce the impact. Actions like these are essential for moving back to a sustainable relationship with the environment. Whether it is reducing greenhouse gas emissions, exposing greenwashing (falsely claiming environmentally friendly practices), or disclosing specific detriments to the public, any step towards climate litigation helps raise awareness about the true, twisted relationship between humankind and our planet. Thus far, all climate litigation attempts can be divided into three waves. The first wave began in the 1980s largely in the United States and Australia, with challenges to administrative processes that had little success. The second wave came in 2007 with the growing awareness about climate change and global warming, following the Kyoto protocol which aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The third wave began in 2015, introducing even more vigorous attempts at law enforcement that resulted in some individual victories (e.g. Leghari v. Pakistan, or Urgenda v. Netherlands). However, prosecuting large companies comes with many difficulties. It is necessary to work on ways to give these individuals more power and recognition for a prosperous global future. This is what delegates in the Legal committee will focus on.