CCPR/C/135/D/3624/2019 8.7 Regarding the authors’ assertion that their islands will become uninhabitable in 10 years (Boigu and Masig) or in 10 to 15 years (Poruma and Warraber) in the absence of urgent action, the Committee recalls that without robust national and international efforts, the effects of climate change may expose individuals to a violation of their rights under article 6 of the Covenant.42 Furthermore, given that the risk of an entire country’s becoming submerged under water is such an extreme risk, the conditions of life in such a country may become incompatible with the right to life with dignity before the risk is realized. 43 The Committee notes that, under the Torres Strait sea walls programme (2019–2023), multiple infrastructures will be constructed and upgraded to address ongoing coastal erosion and storm surge impacts on Poruma, Warraber, Masig, Boigu and Iama. The Committee notes that by 2022, several coastal mitigation works had been completed on Boigu with funding of $A 15 million: the construction of a 1,022 metre-long wave return wall, the raising and extension of an existing bund wall to 450 metres and the upgrading of stormwater drainage infrastructure. The Committee observes that under the programme, coastal mitigation works on Poruma, Warraber and Masig were scheduled to begin in 2021 or 2022 and to be completed by 2023. The Committee takes note of the other adaptation and mitigation measures mentioned by the State party. The Committee considers that the time frame of 10 to 15 years, as suggested by the authors, could allow for intervening acts by the State party involving taking affirmative measures to protect and, where necessary, relocate the alleged victims. The Committee also considers that the information provided by the State party indicates that it is taking adaptive measures to reduce existing vulnerabilities and build resilience to climate change-related harms on the islands. Based on the information made available to it, the Committee is not in a position to conclude that the adaptation measures taken by the State party would be insufficient and therefore represent a direct threat to the authors’ right to life with dignity. 8.8 In view of the foregoing, the Committee considers that the information before it does not disclose a violation by the State party of the authors’ rights under article 6 of the Covenant. Article 17 8.9 The Committee notes the authors’ claims that climate change already affects their private, family and home life, as they face the prospect of having to abandon their homes. The Committee also notes that the erosion of their islands causes the authors significant distress and that flooding occurs on the islands. The Committee further notes the allegation of Stanley Marama that his home was destroyed owing to flooding in 2010. The Committee recalls that States parties must prevent interference with a person’s privacy, family or home that arises from conduct not attributable to the State, at least where such interference is foreseeable and serious.44 Thus, when environmental damage threatens disruption to privacy, family and the home, States parties must prevent serious interference with the privacy, family and home of individuals under their jurisdiction. 8.10 The Committee recalls that the authors depend on fish, other marine resources, land crops and trees for their subsistence and livelihoods and depend on the health of their surrounding ecosystems for their own well-being. The State party has not contested the authors’ assertions in that regard. The Committee considers that the aforementioned elements constitute components of the traditional Indigenous way of life of the authors, who enjoy a special relationship with their territory, and that these elements can be considered to fall within the scope of protection under article 17 of the Covenant.45 In addition, the Committee considers that the application of article 17 should be understood not as being limited to the act of refraining from arbitrary interference; but rather as also obligating States parties to adopt positive measures that are needed to ensure the effective exercise of the rights under 42 43 44 45 14 Ibid., para. 9.11. Ibid. General comment No. 16 (1988), paras. 1 and 9. Benito Oliveira et al. v. Paraguay (CCPR/C/132/D/2552/2015), para. 8.3; and Portillo Cáceres et al. v. Paraguay, para. 7.8.