The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued a groundbreaking advisory opinion stating that nations contributing to pollution may be violating international law if they fail to address the existential threat posed by climate change. This landmark ruling was delivered on Wednesday, marking the first instance in which the UN’s highest court has formally engaged with the pressing climate crisis.
At the heart of the opinion are two critical questions about the legal obligations of countries concerning climate change and the potential consequences for those harming the environment. The ICJ declared climate change an “urgent and existential” threat, unequivocally linked to human activities, and emphasized that the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is crucial for the realization of all human rights.
Yuji Iwasawa, president of the ICJ, highlighted that the negligence of states in protecting the climate could constitute an internationally wrongful act. The court underscored the necessity for nations to collaborate in reducing pollution and stated that countries affected by climate change may seek reparations tailored to their circumstances.
While this advisory opinion is not legally binding, its prominence is expected to significantly enhance climate negotiations and empower climate-related legal actions worldwide. Flora Vano, the country manager for ActionAid in Vanuatu, expressed optimism, stating that this ruling provides a vital mechanism to hold those accountable for the climate crisis and offers hope for rebuilding lives impacted by extreme weather events.
The opinion comes at a time when extreme weather, intensified by climate change, is wreaking havoc around the globe. Recent events have included severe heatwaves and catastrophic floods, claiming over 1,000 lives across regions from the United States to Pakistan.
Notably, the case was initially inspired by law students from Fiji in 2019, who sought to hold wealthier nations accountable for their disproportionate role in climate change. Supported by Vanuatu, a nation facing imminent threats from rising sea levels, the call for the ICJ’s advisory opinion gained momentum in 2021.
In December, over 100 states and organizations participated in the court’s hearings, with developing nations advocating for stronger measures to combat climate change, emphasizing that existing treaties, including the Paris Agreement, are inadequate. The Paris Agreement aims to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, yet current trajectories suggest a potential rise of 3 degrees Celsius by century’s end, which could lead to catastrophic consequences.
The ICJ’s ruling follows a pattern of increasing litigations regarding climate accountability in international courts, including a recent ruling by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea acknowledging carbone emissions from fossil fuels as marine pollution and underscoring countries’ obligations to mitigate its impacts.
As climate change continues to escalate, the ICJ’s opinion serves as a beacon of hope, pushing nations toward both reparative action and collaborative efforts to safeguard our planet for future generations.