Will Europe hear a landmark Russian climate change case?

Today, there are only 1,813 of them remaining, according to the latest census, after conquest, disease outbreaks and assimilation by Russian settlers as well as industrialisation during the Soviet era. Now, what is left of their traditional lifestyle is threatened by the changing climate.

“Any fisherman knows when the best fishing is in his area, what time, where the fish are and when they bite best. This is knowledge of the natural rhythms associated with a particular spot,” Yukaghir elder Vyacheslav Shadrin told Al Jazeera. “Indigenous peoples also possess such knowledge, … and based on this, we developed our survival strategy. … ‘Tomorrow, we’ll be here. Then we’ll move on to some other place’ and so on. And this allowed us to exploit these natural resources effectively and in the most environmentally friendly and ecological manner.”

But these weather cycles are no longer predictable, Shadrin said. “Most elders say that nature is playing tricks or deceiving us. They try to explain why this is happening – because we’ve committed too many violations.”

Temperatures in Russia – the fourth-largest emitter of greenhouse gases after China, the United States and India – are rising at more than twice the global average. This has led to mounting environmental consequences not only on the Siberian tundra but also for the entire planet.

As a result, a group of activists filed a lawsuit against the Russian government four years ago, first through the Russian Supreme Court, then the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Known as the Russian Climate Case, it argued that the Russian government has been irresponsible and failed to meet its international climate obligations.

But in June, an ECHR judge ruled the case inadmissible. “No reasoning was provided,” said Arshak Makichyan, one of the plaintiffs. “Our legal team obviously disagrees, especially since there were similar cases that the court considered and ruled on, so this outcome was quite unexpected for us.

“We can only speculate about the reasons. Personally, I think it was a political decision. … I believe the court was reluctant to deal with Russia on such a serious issue.”