Prominent climate advocate and iwi leader Mike Smith says a proposed Government law change aimed at stopping his landmark climate case before it reaches trial could have serious consequences for democracy, corporate accountability and Māori communities already facing the impacts of climate change.
Smith’s Supreme Court case against some of New Zealand’s largest corporate emitters — including Fonterra, Genesis Energy, Dairy Holdings, NZ Steel and Z Energy — was hailed internationally after the country’s highest court ruled the case could proceed toward trial.
The case argues major companies contributing significantly to greenhouse gas emissions should be held legally accountable for the damage climate change causes to communities and the environment.
But the Government is now considering legislative changes that could effectively prevent such climate lawsuits from moving forward — a move Smith says is unprecedented.
Speaking publicly about the proposal, Smith questioned what it means for the rule of law if Parliament can intervene to halt an active court process.
“This case has already been tested through the courts and the Supreme Court determined it should proceed,” Smith said.
“To now change the law specifically to stop a live case raises very serious constitutional questions.”
The Government has argued climate litigation creates uncertainty for businesses and risks destabilising the economy, particularly for major industries such as agriculture and energy.
But Smith rejects that argument, saying climate change itself is the greatest threat to economic stability.
“The real uncertainty comes from unchecked climate damage — floods, rising seas, destroyed infrastructure and communities being displaced,” he said.
“How can businesses continue profiting while communities are carrying the cost?”
Smith says Māori and coastal communities are already experiencing the frontline impacts of climate change, including erosion, flooding and threats to wāhi tapu and marae.
If the legislation passes, he warns it could remove one of the few remaining pathways communities have to seek accountability from large corporate polluters.
“For Māori especially, this is about intergenerational responsibility — protecting whenua, moana and future generations,” Smith said.
Critics of the proposed law change argue it could weaken corporate accountability at a time when climate impacts are intensifying globally.
Environmental advocates say courts have increasingly become an important mechanism internationally for forcing stronger climate action when governments fail to act quickly enough.
The Supreme Court decision allowing Smith’s case to proceed was seen as groundbreaking because it recognised the possibility that common law could evolve to address modern climate harms.
Legal experts have warned any attempt to retrospectively block climate litigation could trigger wider debate around judicial independence and the separation of powers between Parliament and the courts.
For Smith, the issue goes far beyond one case.
“This is about whether powerful corporations can be held accountable for the harm they contribute to,” he said.
“And it’s about whether communities — especially Māori communities — still have access to justice when their environment and futures are at stake.”
As debate intensifies around climate policy, the proposed changes are likely to spark fierce opposition from environmental groups, legal scholars and indigenous leaders both in Aotearoa and internationally.
#MikeSmith #ClimateJustice #Māori #ClimateChange #Aotearoa #Fonterra #SupremeCourt #CorporateAccountability #EnvironmentalJustice #TeAoMāori #ClimateAction #IndigenousRights #NZPolitics #RadioWaatea #WaateaNews
