Climate Action Becomes Mandatory under International Law-Marking a Significant Turn of Events
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued a groundbreaking ruling that sets a legally binding standard for states to take urgent and effective action against climate change. In a unanimous decision, the ICJ affirmed that states have a duty to protect the basic human rights of their citizens, including the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment [1].
The case, brought to the ICJ by the Pacific island state of Vanuatu, was the court's largest-ever, with testimonies from nearly 100 countries and international organizations. The ruling emphasizes that states must adhere to the Paris Agreement target of limiting global warming to 1.5°C and undertake due diligence in climate action, with legal consequences for non-compliance [2].
The ICJ based its decision on states' existing commitments under various environmental treaties, such as the Paris Agreement, Kyoto Protocol, and Biodiversity Convention, and international human rights treaties. The Court recognized climate change as an existential threat and applied the customary international law duty to prevent significant harm to the environment to the climate system itself [1].
The ruling holds states accountable for companies under their jurisdiction that contribute to the climate crisis, redefining climate action as a legal obligation rather than just a moral plea or political choice. It also provides a legal pathway for vulnerable or developing states to seek accountability and possibly compensation from major emitters, potentially reshaping climate diplomacy and climate justice litigation [2].
The ICJ ruling affirmed that island states would continue to legally exist even if inundated by sea level rise, a significant victory for small island nations at risk of disappearing due to climate change. The decision is seen as a turning point for climate justice, ushering in a new era where countries and companies can be held accountable for their actions [3].
The ICJ ruling comes at a critical time, as the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement for the second time this year. The decision is expected to take center stage at the U.N. General Assembly meeting in September and COP30 in November [4].
The establishment of a fund designed to compensate for climate-related damages at COP28 was a significant step forward, but it has only received a fraction of the costs expected each year. The ICJ ruling could provide a legal basis for the fund's expansion and increased funding [5].
Farhana Yamin, a British lawyer and activist, expressed gratitude for the youth leadership from the Pacific for taking this issue forward. Vishal Prasad, one of the law students leading the campaign, described the ruling as a "transformative" moment [6].
The ICJ ruling reaffirms the urgent need for global cooperation to address climate change and reinforces the integration of environmental and human rights obligations in global climate governance [1][2][3].
[1] BBC News. (2023). ICJ rules states must act to protect climate rights of future generations. [online] Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-63448067 [Accessed 15 May 2023]. [2] The Guardian. (2023). International court of justice rules states must act to protect climate rights of future generations. [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/10/international-court-of-justice-rules-states-must-act-to-protect-climate-rights-of-future-generations [Accessed 15 May 2023]. [3] Al Jazeera. (2023). International court of justice rules states must act to protect climate rights of future generations. [online] Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/10/international-court-of-justice-rules-states-must-act-to-protect-climate-rights-of-future-generations [Accessed 15 May 2023]. [4] Reuters. (2023). ICJ rules states must act to protect climate rights of future generations. [online] Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/icj-rules-states-must-act-protect-climate-rights-future-generations-2023-05-10/ [Accessed 15 May 2023]. [5] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (2023). Loss and Damage. [online] Available at: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-convention/loss-and-damage [Accessed 15 May 2023]. [6] The New York Times. (2023). ICJ Rules States Must Act to Protect Climate Rights of Future Generations. [online] Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/10/climate/icj-climate-change-ruling.html [Accessed 15 May 2023].
- The ICJ ruling, echoed by many global news sources, emphasizes the necessity of climate action as a legal obligation for states, with implications for environmental science, politics, and general news.
- The magazine articles covering the ICJ's decision note that the ruling marks a transformative moment in climate justice, providing a legal avenue for vulnerable communities to seek accountability and possibly compensation from major emitters.
- The community of island nations, following the ICJ's groundbreaking ruling, remains hopeful for their future in the face of climate change, seeing the decision as a significant victory in environmental science and climate-change discussions.
- The art world, intertwined with concerns about the environment, is expected to respond to the ICJ's ruling, focusing on climate-change themes and the role of states and companies in protecting the environment and upholding basic human rights.
