Against whom is the claim directed?
Heidelberg Materials, one of the world’s biggest cement manufacturers. They are not only industry leaders but also top emitters of greenhouse gases.
High up in the “Carbon Majors” database, RWE and Heidelberg Materials have been significant contributors to the GHG emissions responsible for human-induced climate change
- Since 1965, RWE’s contribution to global industrial emissions amounts to at least 0.68%
- Since 1965, Heidelberg Materials’ contribution to global industrial emissions amounts to at least 0.12%
Since they were founded in the 19th century, both companies have adopted a business model which gains profit from the externalization of ecological costs and its consequences. Although the link between their business activities and the global destruction of livelihoods has been proven for over six decades, RWE and Heidelberg Materials have continued their production practices without interruption. Thus, they stand as emblematic of an economic model that fuels the climate crisis, while failing to fulfil their duty of care towards people and the environment.
Emissions released by German polluters have worldwide impacts – often afflicting countries in the Global South disproportionately. Their effects may take years or even decades to appear. And while the skies over the Ruhr region have long been clear, people in Pakistan are still grappling with the resulting consequences.
Now, the claimants seek to hold those who have significantly contributed to this harm accountable for their fair share of the costs.
Since 1898, RWE has profited from generating electricity by burning fossil fuels, such as coal, gas and oil. RWE embodies the European model of industrialization more than almost any other company. For decades, the skies over the Ruhr region were gray and filled with soot from RWE power plants, severely impacting the health of local residents and workers.
According to the Higher Regional Court of Hamm in its ruling of 28 May 2025, RWE has been aware of the consequences of greenhouse gas emissions on the global climate and their link to global warming and extreme weather events since 1965. Yet, although IPCC reports have warned about the climate crisis since 1992, it was only in 2006 that RWE officially recognized human-caused climate change – a decision, however, that brought no relevant changes to its business model. RWE remains one of the largest CO₂ emitters in Europe, and until 2020, about a quarter of the electricity it produced came from dirty lignite.
Since 1873, Heidelberg Materials has produced cement and other building materials, benefiting from the huge demand for concrete in industrial and construction projects. Since the early 1970s, it has been scientifically established that concrete – particularly cement production – requires the emission of large quantities of greenhouse gases, with significant climate impacts.
This was explicitly confirmed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its Second Assessment Report in 1995. Despite decades of public documentation on the climate impact of cement production, Heidelberg Materials only adopted a so-called formal climate policy in 2018. At the same time, the company continues to lobby against key policies, for example by signing the Antwerp Declaration, which opposes binding regulations for decarbonizing European industry.
FAQ
The case is about justice for the 43 farmers. It seeks to address real damage done to real people, who are seeking monetary compensation from those who caused and contributed to the damage. For medico international and ECCHR the aim is to support the farmers from Sindh in seeking accountability for the rights violations they have suffered as a result of the climate crisis.
The devastation caused by the 2022 floods in Pakistan stands as a stark reminder of how deeply climate-related damage can affect both individuals and entire societies. The compensation claim lodged by Pakistani farmers highlights the perspectives of those most affected by the crisis and carries their fight for justice to those responsible in Germany.
Their case will bring a new voice in a broader, transnational demand for a global legal framework that holds the perpetrators of the climate crisis accountable. Major polluters must take responsibility for the consequences of the damage their actions have caused.
The claim is addressed to RWE, one of the largest electricity producers in Europe, and Heidelberg Materials, one of the major cement producers worldwide.
The term “Carbon Majors” refers to companies that have contributed significantly to climate change. The term was coined by studies conducted by the Climate Accountability Institute, which found that just over 100 companies are responsible for nearly 70% of global historical industrial greenhouse gas emissions. RWE and Heidelberg Materials are two of them. As Carbon Majors, they are responsible for a significant proportion of global industrial greenhouse gas emissions.
Historically, both companies are among the top carbon emitters worldwide and among the two biggest polluters with headquarters and major operations in Germany. The latest studies utilizing the Carbon Majors methodology show that RWE is responsible for at least 0.68% and Heidelberg Materials 0.12% of global industrial emissions since 1965.
Major corporate emitters have thus far managed to avoid genuine accountability. Holding them to account in court is the only avenue left to ensure that those who contributed significantly to the crisis bear their fair share of its costs, instead of leaving all these costs to affected communities.
The case builds upon the legal foundations established in the Saúl Luciano Lliuya v. RWE case, where a German court accepted in principle that a major emitter could be held liable for climate-related damages abroad.
All 43 farmers involved come from Sindh Province, the region in southern Pakistan most affected by the unprecedented floods of 2022. They live in three different districts: Jacobabad, Dadu and Larkana. Their survival is based on the crops they produce on their small plots of land and they struggle to maintain their independence from large landowners and agricultural corporations. They have been exposed to changing weather patterns and the destruction of their livelihoods caused by climate change for many years.
The 43 farmers demanding compensation from RWE and Heidelberg Materials are supported by 10,000 farmers from their village communities. Their fight for climate justice highlights the situation of 33 million people affected by the 2022 flood disaster in Pakistan, as well as many other communities around the world that are already impacted by the climate crisis.
The 43 farmers in Pakistan are not alone facing RWE and Heidelberg Materials. More than 10,000 people in their villages are supporting them. They are assisted locally by the socio-medical aid organization HANDS Welfare Foundation and the trade-union federation NTUF.
The National Trade Union Federation (NTUF) empowers farmers in conflicts on land and labor rights. The HANDS Welfare Foundation works in rural Sindh communities on the transition to climate-adapted agriculture and supports village self-organization.
For decades, both organizations, supported by medico international, have been working to improve working and living conditions in Pakistan. In their pursuit of justice, medico international and the human rights organization ECCHR stand firmly by their side.
There is a broader struggle for climate justice, in which the people of Pakistan are also fighting, beyond the legal arena, to safeguard their livelihoods. They are combining legal action with political demands for support in reconstruction, food sovereignty, and debt relief.
Farmers are directly affected by the changing living conditions and the growing impossibility of sustaining life in their region. Without justice, their future prospects will become increasingly bleak.
At the same time, they are aware that their villages are only a few of many worldwide that are exposed to the same devastation in the context of the climate crisis: Many people in Pakistan, and across the world are threatened in their existence and human rights by the destructive fossil fuel based economic model and the climate crisis.
All people have the same right to live in dignity and self-determination, and to a healthy environment that makes this possible. Yet the impacts of the climate crisis are eroding these very foundations. The burden of climate-related damage is far from evenly shared: those who have contributed least to global warming are often the ones who suffer its effects most severely. The main culprits and beneficiaries of global warming—high-emission corporations and industrialised nations—are typically less affected and possess far greater means to shield themselves from disaster. But the climate crisis is not a natural phenomenon; it has perpetrators and profiteers who must be held accountable.
Taking the “polluter pays” principle seriously means recognizing their particular responsibility—not only to drastically and rapidly reduce emissions, but also to address the consequences of the crisis. This includes both material and immaterial damage, as well as climate-related human rights violations. Ultimately, climate justice means dismantling the structures that perpetuate inequality and injustice.
The Pakistan climate cost case is part of a growing movement for climate justice worldwide. Several actions have been filed for climate reparations against major polluters.
Most recently, on 23 October 2025, the Odette case was launched: 67 Odette typhoon survivors from island communities in the Philippines sent a formal notice to the fossil fuel company Shell demanding financial compensation for the losses and damage they experienced under Odette. It is an unprecedented lawsuit in the UK and globally, as the first civil claim to directly link polluting companies to deaths and personal injuries that have already happened in the global south.
ECCHR is already supporting residents of Pari Island in their lawsuit filed in Switzerland against HOLCIM. After a hearing that took place 3 September 2025 before the court of Zug, a decision on the admissibility of the case is expected to be reached soon.
In Belgium, through the farmer case, a farmer is asking the court to demand TotalEnergies to repair the damage he has suffered and make a financial contribution to the green transition. He is also asking judges to oblige the company to move away from fossil fuels in order to prevent future damage.
In Germany, the 28 May 2025 decision in the Saúl Luciano Lliuya v. RWE case confirmed the legal principle that major emitters can be liable for transboundary harms.
For more information on the legal claim, see ECCHR case page.
Solidarity matters. The Pakistani farmers will need plenty of it as they embark on this legal battle.
Their country has been hit especially hard by the impacts of the climate crisis, yet they know many others are facing the same fate. When people, organizations and initiatives share their story, talk about their struggle and spread the message, this support makes a difference.
Information materials about the case are available free of charge in English and German and can also be shared on social media. [links provided]. medico international and ECCHR, the supporting organizations in Germany, are available for talks and events.
Donations are also welcome, and they help fund medico international’s ongoing work in Pakistan, supporting community-led climate adaptation, education, and reconstruction projects.