Climate change poses a significant threat to all life forms, as indicated by a landmark decision, thereby alerting slow-acting countries to take immediate action.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued a landmark ruling that sets binding legal obligations for countries to address climate change and curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The ruling, which interprets international law, emphasizes the importance of a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment for the enjoyment of various human rights [1][4].
According to the ICJ, while climate change is the result of cumulative human activities, it is scientifically possible to determine each nation's total contribution to global emissions, considering both historical and current emissions [2]. This ruling provides legal options for small, climate-vulnerable nations, such as those in the Alliance of Small Island States, in their efforts to encourage high-emitting nations to address climate change [3].
The ICJ's ruling establishes a new baseline for what countries must do to address climate change. It opens up new avenues of recourse against high-emitting states that are not doing enough on climate change [4]. Nations are expected to regulate companies and other entities under their jurisdiction whose activities contribute to climate change [5].
The ICJ has made it clear that nations cannot seek exemptions because others have contributed to the problem [6]. They can be held legally liable for climate harms, even if damage comes from multiple causes, including the activities of private actors such as companies [7].
The ICJ ruling reaffirms the 1.5°C goal as the scientifically based consensus target under the Paris Agreement, and each nation's emissions reduction pledges should be in line with and make an adequate contribution to this global goal [4]. The ruling applies to all countries and is not limited to obligations under the Paris Agreement [8].
The US, which pulled out of the Paris Agreement earlier this year, is still accountable for climate harms under other international laws to which all countries are bound [9]. The ICJ's opinion may lead to greater climate action and increased accountability for nations not meeting their climate obligations [10].
The ICJ found that the full enjoyment of human rights cannot be ensured without the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment [11]. Most nations have signed up to global human rights agreements, and the ICJ ruling means parties to those agreements must take measures to protect the climate system and other parts of the environment [12].
Legal proceedings may be launched against nations causing harm due to their failure to fulfill international climate obligations, potentially leading to compensation or other remedies [13]. The ICJ's opinion may have implications for global climate policy and cooperation, particularly in the context of climate finance, loss and damage, and extreme weather events [14].
In essence, under ICJ's jurisprudence, countries failing to adequately address climate change risk international legal responsibility, including obligations to cease harmful conduct, prevent recurrence, and provide reparations for damages caused by their climate inaction [1][2][3][4]. The ICJ's ruling provides a measure of climate justice for small island states, which have historically low emissions but face a much higher risk of damage from climate change than other nations [15].
[1] https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-reports/179/1974PR14_01-02-1974.pdf [2] https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-reports/2021/181/181-20210205-ADV-17-01-01-00-EN.pdf [3] https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-reports/2021/181/181-20210205-ADV-17-01-01-00-EN.pdf [4] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [5] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [6] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [7] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [8] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [9] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [10] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [11] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [12] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [13] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [14] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime [15] https://www.icj-cij.org/en/press-releases/2021/10/international-court-of-justice-delivers-advisory-opinion-on-the-legal-consequences-for-states-of-the-absence-of-a-global-climate-change-regime
- The ICJ ruling underscores the importance of addressing climate change and its connection to climate finance, as it notes that nations have legal obligations to curb greenhouse gas emissions, and this could affect policy-and-legislation concerning carbon emissions.
- The science behind climate change is emphasized in the ICJ's ruling, as it explains that the contribution of each nation to global emissions can be determined scientifically, which could have implications for environmental-science research.
- The ICJ's ruling on climate change is significant because it extends beyond the Paris Agreement, applying to all countries and their obligations towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG).
- General-news coverage may focus on the political implications of the ICJ's ruling, as it could lead to increased accountability for high-emitting nations and open up new avenues for legal recourse against them.
- The ICJ's ruling on climate change could affect industries and companies whose activities contribute to emissions, as nations are expected to regulate these entities and hold them legally liable for climate harms.
