Deterring Dissent? Climate Activism and the Recalibration of Articles 10 and 11 in Recent ECtHR Jurisprudence

This article examines whether recent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights reflects a recalibration from protection toward deterrence in cases involving climate activism. While the Court has historically afforded comparatively strong protection to symbolic, provocative, and disruptive forms of political expression under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, recent judgments suggest a more cautious and deferential approach toward domestic public order assessments. Through a doctrinal and comparative analysis of the Court's environmental and protest-related jurisprudence, including Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland, Bryan and Others v. Russia, Friedrich v. Poland, and Ludes and Others v. France, the article identifies an emerging pattern characterised by procedural deference, uneven proportionality review, and increased emphasis on public order considerations, criminal legality, and public property protection. It argues that this development risks narrowing the practical scope of expressive and assembly rights in the context of climate activism, particularly for individual activists engaging in peaceful but disruptive protest. The article concludes by proposing doctrinal clarifications intended to strengthen the coherence of the Court's proportionality analysis and to ensure that Articles 10 and 11 continue to function as effective guarantees of democratic participation and public interest expression in the context of climate change.