Ten Australians have filed a complaint with the United Nations Human Rights Committee, arguing that the federal government's continued support for fossil fuel exports violates their human rights by fueling climate extremes. The claimants include Brendon Donohue, a legally blind man trapped in his second-storey apartment for 10 days during the February 2022 Brisbane floods; Jack Egan, who lost his house in Batemans Bay to bushfires on New Year's Eve 2019; Mel Fisher, whose auto-inflammatory skin condition worsened during an Adelaide heatwave; and Latisha Francis, an Indigenous woman affected by a toxic algal bloom linked to rising sea temperatures.
The Claimants' Stories
Donohue, 33, has Peters plus syndrome, limiting his movement. During the floods, he received evacuation alerts but could not leave safely as the lift, intercom, and front entrance were shut down. “It was terrifying,” he said. “The whole street was badly impacted with water. The power went out, which made me not able to contact anyone. I ran out of food but couldn’t get any into the building.”
Egan recalled losing his home to the 2019-20 Black Summer bushfires. He described flames consuming his front deck and licking into his home through the windows. After giving up trying to save his property, he ran through raining embers to escape. He could not find his partner, Cath, for hours and feared she had died; she was later found safe on a nearby beach. “I thought for some time that she was dead,” he said.
Fisher stayed in her small brick public housing home in Elizabeth Vale, Adelaide, during a heatwave last summer. With multiple days above 40°C and a night with a minimum of 34°C, the house trapped heat, exacerbating her painful auto-inflammatory skin condition. “I have poor insulation, the interior walls are all concrete and I have a tin roof. I genuinely thought I might die from the heat,” Fisher said. “Sometimes the pain gets so bad that it can feel like my skin is ripping and tearing.”
Francis, a 25-year-old Ngarrindjeri, Kaurna, and Narungga woman studying marine conservation, described an unprecedented toxic algal bloom linked to a spike in sea temperatures. The bloom killed wildlife and drove her family away from a coastline they have used for millennia. “It was so distressing, from an Indigenous perspective,” she said. “So much of our culture was being shared by the ocean. A lot of people just distance themselves from the water now because they are too scared to go near it.”
The Legal Complaint
Organized by the Human Rights Law Centre, Environmental Justice Australia, and Earthjustice, the complaint argues that the government is violating claimants' human rights by continuing to support coal and gas developments that fuel climate extremes. It is the first legal claim in an international court or body against a state for climate harm since the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion in March 2024 that states have a legal obligation to take measures to prevent climate harm. Australia was one of 140 countries that passed a UN resolution backing that ruling.
If the UN committee finds in their favor, it could recommend actions the government should take. The claimants say the government, as a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, would be bound to consider the findings in good faith, but the recommendations would not be enforceable.
Scientific Support
David Karoly, an emeritus professor at the University of Melbourne and former lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said international and Australian agencies have repeatedly demonstrated that emissions from burning coal, oil, and gas significantly increase the risk of damage from bushfires, floods, and heatwaves. He said the federal government should be accountable: “Australia has to take responsibility for its emissions, whether it is domestic emissions or the larger emissions overseas after it exports coal and gas.”
Karoly acknowledged that Australian courts have not agreed. The federal court last year found the government did not have a legal responsibility to protect the Torres Strait Islands from climate change, despite agreeing in forceful language that they faced a bleak future if urgent action was not taken. That case is being appealed.
Political Reactions
The complaint is supported by some crossbench MPs, including independent Zali Steggall. She said it highlights a “glaring inconsistency” in climate policy: that the country is taking steps to cut domestic emissions as it expands support for fossil fuel exports. “The stories of these claimants show climate change is not an abstract future threat,” she said.
The government is expected to argue that it is backing renewable energy and cutting emissions at home, aiming to develop clean export industries to replace fossil fuels, and that there is little point in damaging trade relationships by cutting off coal and gas when there is still demand and other countries are selling them.
Legal Expert Opinion
Harj Narulla, a London-based barrister with Doughty Street Chambers and Oxford University who specializes in climate litigation, said Australia has a “huge amount of liability and exposure” given the scale of its fossil fuel exports. “I think Australia has a very, very challenging case to answer,” he said. “It’s the first complaint of its kind we’ve seen against Australia, but I don’t think it will be the last.”
