The highest point of the Indonesian island Pari stands at 1.5 meters above sea level – for now. Climate change has been causing the water to rise steadily for years, endangering the livelihoods of the island residents, who are struggling more frequently with increasingly severe flooding. By 2050 at the latest, most of the island could be underwater. But the people on Pari do not want to simply accept the demise of their homeland: they are taking legal action in Switzerland against one of the world’s largest emitters of climate-damaging greenhouse gases, the cement company Holcim.

​​Arif Pujianto, Asmania, Bobby and Edi Mulyono turned to the Swiss judiciary in July 2022 with a conciliation request, with the support of ECCHR, the Swiss organization HEKS/EPR, and the Indonesian environmental organization WAHLI. In January 2023, they filed a civil lawsuit against Holcim. They are demanding that Holcim reduce its CO2 emissions as quickly as possible, compensate for damage already caused, and finance urgently needed flood protection measures. On 3 September 2025, the main hearing took place at the Cantonal Court of Zug to determine whether to admit the lawsuit. On 22 December the court declared the climate lawsuit admissable and allowed all claims set out in the complaint to proceed. 

Want to stay up to date? Then subscribe to our climate lawsuit newsletter now.

Holcim is the largest manufacturer of building materials in the world. The company is also still today one of the global market leaders for cement. The company’s business operations have contributed significantly to climate change: HEKS/EPER commissioned a study, according to which Holcim produced over seven billion tons of cement from 1950 to 2021 and caused almost the exact same amount of CO₂ emissions during this same period. This amounts to 0.42 percent of all global industrial emissions in human history.

Holcim has been aware of the high emissions of cement production and their impacts on the climate for at least 30 years. In spite of this, during this time, the company more than doubled its emissions, whose damaging effects are being felt by the people on Pari. This is why the four plaintiffs submitted a conciliation request in July 2022 to the so-called Judges of the Peace (Friedensrichter) in Zug, where Holcim’s main headquarters are located. After the conciliation proceedings failed to yield results, the four residents filed a civil suit against Holcim in January 2023. On 3 September 2025, the Zug Cantonal Court convened to determine the admissibility of the lawsuit against Holcim. After free legal aid had already been granted at the end of October 2023, the court's decision on legal protection for the plaintiffs is now pending.

The inhabitants of Pari have contributed practically nothing to climate change. On the contrary, they have traditionally worked as fishermen and -women, actively engage in the protection of corals and mangroves, and practice ecological tourism on the island. Nonetheless, they are the ones who are forced to adapt to the effects of climate change. Pari has always been affected by flooding, but in recent years, this has increased dramatically, both in frequency and strength. The consequences: wells contaminated by salt water, dead trees, flooded beaches and houses – all of which has led to fewer tourists, an important source of income for the island.

Climate-related damages and losses, caused by flooding, heat waves, storms and droughts, are already a reality in many places throughout the world. However, the biggest polluters – industrialized countries and transnational corporations – are postponing political solutions year after year, while these dangerous developments have become an existential threat, particularly for people in the Global South.​​ But they can be held accountable for this. In May 2025, for example, the Higher Regional Court in Hamm ruled that “Carbon Majors” like Holcim can in principle be held liable for the costs of climate change. And in July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague confirmed in an advisory opinion, prompted by an initiative from the island nation of Vanuatu, that climate protection is an obligation under international law – and outlined the legal consequences of violating this obligation.