18:00 | Hamm (Germany), Mar. 18.
On Monday, March 17, a hearing began at the Higher Regional Court of Hamm in Germany regarding the lawsuit filed by Peruvian mountain guide and farmer Saul Luciano Lliuya against the German energy company RWE, which he accuses of causing the melting of glaciers in the Peruvian Andes.
Saul Luciano Lliuya, 44, argues that electricity producer RWE —one of the world's top emitters of carbon dioxide— must share the cost of protecting his hometown, Huaraz, from a swollen glacier lake that is at risk of overflowing from melting snow and ice.
According to the NGO Germanwatch, which supports the farmer, his house is at risk due to the melting of the Andean glaciers, which have already raised the water level of Lake Palcacocha "dangerously several times."
"The glaciers are melting, they are disappearing little by little," Lliuya said on Monday before the hearing.
"Some lakes, like Palcacocha, pose a risk to me and more than 50,000 people living in the danger zone," he added.
The lawsuit seeks to have RWE contribute approximately €17,000 (US$18,400) toward protection measures for the glacial lake in Peru, situated at an altitude of 4,500 meters above sea level.
His argument is that the fossil fuels RWE uses to generate electricity make it partially responsible for the risk of flooding due to glacier melt around Lake Palcacocha, in the central mountain range.
Saul Luciano Lliuya bases his claim on a 2014 study that concluded that RWE was responsible for 0.47% of all global carbon emissions since the start of the industrial era.
RWE, which has never operated in Peru, would have to pay its share of the €3.5 million (US$3.8 million) needed to lower the water levels of Lake Palcacocha.
"What I am asking is that the company take responsibility for part of the costs of building a dam to reduce the risks" of the lake overflowing, Lliuya stated at a press conference earlier this month before traveling to Germany.
"This case is unique. I have full confidence in these proceedings," said the farmer, who lives in Huaraz, northwestern Peru.
Despite Lliuya's confidence in the legal proceedings, the case has progressed slowly.
He first filed the lawsuit in 2015, but a court in Essen, western Germany, where RWE is headquartered, dismissed it the following year.
However, in 2017, a higher court in Hamm accepted an appeal and ordered the collection of evidence.
After a delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic, German experts and judges visited Lake Palcacocha and the surrounding glaciers in Huaraz in 2022 to assess the effects of climate change.
As a result, hearings were scheduled for this week in a German court.
The first day was dedicated to analyzing climate risks in Huaraz's region, particularly the risk of the glacial lake overflowing, explained a lawyer for the plaintiffs. A second and final hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, March 19.
"I never would have thought that all of this would take so long," Lliuya told Germanwatch.
"Fair Contribution"
The court must examine how much Lliuya's property is at substantial risk of flooding. To do so, it will analyze the evidence collected by court-appointed experts who traveled to the area in 2022.
If judges confirm the risk, subsequent hearings would look at the question of RWE's responsibility.
Founded in 1898, RWE now uses a variety of power sources, including gas and coal as well as solar and wind.
"It is time for companies like RWE to contribute fairly to the costs of the damages they have helped cause," said Francesca Mascha Klein, legal officer at Germanwatch.
RWE says a court ruling in favor of Lliuya would set a precedent of holding people responsible under German law for actions that have environmental consequences abroad.
"We think that is legally inadmissible and the wrong way to address this issue socially and politically," a spokesman stated.
When dismissing the case in 2015, the Essen court said that it was impossible to draw a link between particular emissions and particular damage.
According to Zero Carbon Analytics, a nonprofit research group, the hearing in Hamm could be the first step toward overturning the initial decision that dismissed the case.
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, the law firm representing RWE, stated there could be major implications.
"The sum in dispute may be less than €20,000 (US$21,647). But the precedent-setting potential is clear," it said.
(END) AFP/MAO/JMP/MVB
Published: 3/18/2025