In the relevant paragraph, the Committee appears to be drawing on language used in a 2018 report by the then Special Rapporteur on the environment and human rights, John Knox,  [to] take into account the rights of the children who are constantly arriving, or have already arrived, on this planet”. However, the GC’s language is not identical to that used in the report and ultimately the meaning of the relevant paragraph of the GC in this regard is less clear than that of the report.

The last few years have seen

Significant body of work in the IHRL context with regard to future generations’ rights. Crucial developments include the recent expert Maastricht Principles on the Human Rights of Future Generations, the work of the UN Secretary General special lead on future generations, as well as efforts in relation to the pending UN Declaration for Future Generations. None of this work is reflected in the GC though the Committee will certainly have been aware of it.

The General Comment makes clear that

The Committee recognizes the principle of intergenerational equity and the interests of future generations” but it does not define that principle in any detail or address the relationship between future generations’ interests and those amo market now offers sales ai integration with amocrm of current/present generations, including children. The Committee’s final statement in the key paragraph is that “[b]eyond their immediate obligations under the Convention with regard to the environment, States bear the responsibility Where he argued for for foreseeable environment-related threats arising as a result of their acts or omissions now, the full implications of which may not manifest china numbers for years or even decades”. This formulation clearly embraces state responsibility and causality but it does not make clear how such responsibility relates to future generations.