Climate action is now a mandatory requirement under international law, marking a significant development.
International Court of Justice Clarifies Binding Legal Obligations for Countries on Climate Change
In a landmark ruling, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has established that countries have binding legal obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect the environment, and cooperate internationally to address climate change. This decision, grounded in international environmental and human rights law, sets a significant precedent for global climate governance.
Countries now have a legal duty to comply with commitments under treaties like the Paris Agreement, aiming to limit global warming to 1.5°C. They are also obligated to ensure a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as a foundation for human rights. Failure to act adequately could result in legal claims and international pressure, potentially incurring legal responsibility requiring cessation of wrongful acts, guarantees of non-repetition, and reparations.
The ruling underscores the importance of international cooperation and assistance, especially for vulnerable nations severely impacted by climate change. These states can now more easily sue each other over climate change due to this ruling.
For companies, while the ruling directly addresses States, it indirectly raises expectations that States will regulate and oversee private sector emissions and activities contributing to climate change. Companies may face increased national and international regulatory scrutiny, greater requirements for transparency, reporting, and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and potential liability risks where States demand reparations or corrective measures involving private actors based on States' obligations under international law.
Though the ICJ’s opinion is advisory and not legally binding like a court judgment, its authoritative nature is likely to influence international climate governance, future litigation, and global climate legislation. The decision amplifies the legal framework holding States—and by extension regulated companies—accountable to climate justice, biodiversity protection, and the safeguarding of human rights.
The ICJ's ruling on climate change was the court's largest-ever case, with testimonies from nearly 100 countries and international organizations. Notably, the decision establishes a state's duty to protect basic human rights, including to a "clean, healthy and sustainable environment." The ruling reframes climate action as a legal obligation, not just a moral plea or a political choice.
The ICJ President affirmed that climate change threatens basic human rights, and the ruling holds states accountable for companies under their jurisdiction which fuel the climate crisis. Climate migrants should not be returned to countries where their lives are at risk, according to the ICJ.
The ICJ affirmed that island states would legally continue to exist even if inundated by sea level rise. The ruling opens the door to fresh legal challenges for compensation and reparations, empowering nations, groups, or people harmed by climate impacts to demand further reparations from major polluters.
The purpose of the ICJ's decision is to give advice to states on the content of international law. The ICJ set 1.5 degrees Celsius of global heating as the legally binding standard for states' action plans under the Paris Agreement. A fund designed to compensate for climate-related damages was established two years ago at COP28, but it has only received a fraction of the costs expected each year.
The ruling is expected to take center stage at the U.N. General Assembly meeting in September and COP30 in November. Vishal Prasad, one of the law students leading the campaign, sees the ruling as a "transformative" moment. The ICJ's landmark ruling that failure to curb greenhouse gas emissions may be "internationally wrongful" was backed by over 100 countries and organizations, which was adopted unanimously.
- This landmark ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) establishes that art and science, particularly environmental science, have a crucial role in supporting the legal obligations for countries to address climate change.
- In response to the ICJ's ruling, a growing number of environmental magazines are publishing articles discussing policy-and-legislation related to climate change, offering insights on the impact on communities worldwide.
- A new campaign spearheaded by a group of student activists is demanding that governments implement stricter environmental policies to honor their legal obligations and mitigate the effects of climate change on the environment and general-news.
- As the ICJ ruling mandates international cooperation in addressing climate change, many civil societies are forming communities dedicated to fostering collaboration across countries to combat climate change and protect the environment.
- The climate-change litigation resulting from the ICJ's ruling has sparked a wave of public interest in various sectors, revealing how politics plays a critical role in the enforcement of legal obligations for countries dealing with climate change.
