“Will The Law Rise to Meet Its Highest Calling?” The Historic ICJ Climate Hearings on Climate Justice   – Center for International Environmental Law

Printed March 26, 2025

By Joie Chowdhury, Senior Legal professional on the Middle for Worldwide Environmental Legislation, and Vishal Prasad, Director of Pacific Islands College students Combating Local weather Change

In December 2024, the world’s highest court docket turned the stage for what could be the “greatest case in human historical past.”   Over two weeks,  96 States from each area of the world in addition to 11 Worldwide Organizations gathered on the Worldwide Court docket of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague to current arguments in its local weather advisory opinion (AO) proceedings, on two defining questions,: What are States’ authorized obligations to deal with local weather change, and what are the authorized penalties for failing to satisfy them? Parallel to the hearings youth campaigners from the Pacific and internationally led highly effective mobilizations, creating house for frontline voices to straight demand justice for local weather hurt.  

At its core, this case is about accountability.  For too lengthy, States most answerable for the local weather disaster and its devastating impacts have evaded obligation. However climate-vulnerable nations and their authorized consultants made their voices heard on the ICJ, urging the Court docket to affirm clear authorized penalties for local weather destruction. These authorized proceedings might grow to be a turning level for local weather justice, and counter many years of political inertia. An formidable advisory opinion might reshape international local weather coverage, reinforce human rights protections, and pave the best way for main polluters to treatment and restore the injury they’ve precipitated. 

A Crossroad For Local weather Justice 

To zoom in on the hearings: Tuvalu’s oral submission, emblematic of many climate-vulnerable States, was a sobering one. Regardless of producing lower than 0.01% of GHG emissions, Tuvalu is predicted to be the primary nation to be utterly misplaced to climate-related sea stage rise. In a wrestle in opposition to erasure, Tuvaluans are even exploring a digital Nation initiative to recreate Tuvalu’s land, tradition, and authorities in digital kind. Highlighting the near-certain threat of existential hurt to Tuvalu, their counsel forcefully argued for States’ proper to survival, and folks’s rights to self-determination, specifically the correct of peoples to find out their very own destiny.

In the course of the hearings and within the face of existential stakes, a transparent divide emerged: a number of main contributors to the local weather disaster, together with america, the UK, Kuwait, Germany, and Russia, sought to evade their obligation by downplaying obligations, overstating complexities, and ignoring historic emissions. In the meantime, most nations and worldwide organizations, led by climate-vulnerable International South nations, pushed for a broader framework incorporating fairness, historic duty, self-determination, and the human rights of current and future generations. 

Key Highlights From The Hearings: Inside And Outdoors The Courtroom

The Authorized Challenge on the Coronary heart of the Proceedings

On the very first day, counsel for Vanuatu and the Melanesian Spearhead Group compellingly argued of their joint intervention that the conduct answerable for local weather change, and its catastrophic penalties, is illegal below a number of sources of customary and traditional worldwide legislation, together with, human rights legislation, legislation of the ocean, in addition to local weather and environmental legislation. States partaking in such illegal conduct, should then stop such conduct, assure non-repetition, and supply full reparation. A majority of interventions coalesced round this place, united in readability and rigor.

Relevant Legislation

Central to oral arguments was the query: What legislation governs State duties in relation to local weather change? 

The US together with different massive polluters argued that local weather obligations have been restricted to authorized duties below the local weather treaties, particularly, the Paris Settlement, whereas a majority of States and worldwide organizations, together with Vanuatu, the Philippines, and the African Union, rightly advocated for drawing on your complete spectrum of related worldwide legislation. The local weather regime ought to inform State obligations, however it neither exhaustively nor solely defines States’ authorized obligations to deal with the local weather disaster.

Human Rights

A number of nations, reminiscent of Spain, Samoa, the Philippines, Cameroon, Colombia, Albania, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ⎯ simply to call a number of ⎯ mounted a robust protection of human rights obligations. Notably, the correct to self-determination, the correct to a clear, wholesome, and sustainable setting, in addition to the rights of future generations, amongst different rights, have been powerfully argued earlier than the Court docket. In the meantime, massive polluters sought to disclaim or weaken their authorized duties by rejecting or proscribing the appliance of human rights treaty obligations to local weather change. 

Preventive Obligations

The US and Australia, amongst different massive polluters, argued that the obligation to forestall transboundary hurt doesn’t apply to international greenhouse fuel emissions or local weather change, however quite is proscribed to slender conditions of transboundary air pollution. However, as additionally interpreted by the ICJ itself, States have longstanding duties below worldwide legislation, to not trigger or permit conduct of their territories that may trigger vital environmental hurt to different States. Counsel for Vanuatu argued: 

“..if an remoted incident of transboundary air pollution is illegal, it’s unthinkable that the last word type of air pollution shouldn’t be. It could be like accepting the tragic irony, famously famous by Raphael Lemkin, that homicide is illegal, however genocide shouldn’t be.”

Authorized Penalties for Local weather Harmful Conduct

A flashpoint within the proceedings involved the authorized penalties of climate-destructive actions. Such penalties embody cessation of dangerous conduct, and provision of full reparations – restitution, compensation, and satisfaction. The world’s main polluters, reminiscent of america and Russia, tried to erect authorized boundaries to establishing the idea for triggering authorized penalties and have been forcefully countered by lots of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations, together with Fiji and Costa Rica. Requires treatment and reparation went far past financial compensation, together with structural measures reminiscent of equitable fossil gas phase-out; avoiding reliance on measures that will exacerbate hurt, reminiscent of geoengineering;  eco-restoration; and debt cancellation. 

Confronting Structural Injustice

This “depraved” drawback of local weather change, as we deem it within the environmental world, is colonization on repeat. Shernell Hadaway, Counsel, Saint Vincent and Grenadines

The structural hyperlinks between local weather hurt and systemic injustice made unequivocally clear within the oral proceedings have been a reminder that the struggle for local weather justice can also be a struggle for fairness and dignity. A number of delegations, together with the Prepare dinner Islands,  Marshall Islands, and Kenya, argued the significance of addressing structural drivers of the local weather disaster, reminiscent of colonial pasts, in addition to racial and gender injustice, whereas Palestine highlighted the vital subject of State duty for the impacts on local weather attributable to armed battle and different army actions, together with in conditions of occupation. 

Contained in the Courtroom and Past: A Clarion Name for Local weather Justice

The distinctive parts of those proceedings lie each in unprecedented engagement of States and worldwide organizations, a results of the substantive collaboration, inside and throughout areas, led by Vanuatu and lots of International South nations, in addition to the accompanying marketing campaign led by Pacific activists and youth campaigners worldwide. Many delegations appeared earlier than the Court docket for the primary time, with nations represented in lots of circumstances, not by well-known legislation companies or lecturers, as is commonly the norm, however by various nationwide delegations composed of diplomats, nationwide legal professionals, youth campaigners in addition to neighborhood and Indigenous leaders.

Small Island nations and different climate-vulnerable nations introduced technically rigorous arguments, whereas additionally portray a vivid image of their local weather realities by movies, witness statements and resonant storytelling. Some delegations ceded time to youth leaders from the Pacific Island College students Combating for Local weather Change (PISFCC) and World’s Youth for Local weather Justice (WYCJ) to talk on to the Court docket, they usually every issued highly effective requires local weather justice.

Undoubtedly the ICJ proceedings have been among the many most inclusive within the historical past of the Court docket, creating a novel house for the infusion of different views rooted in Indigenous and cultural practices, place-based information, and lived experiences of individuals in International South nations to tell worldwide legislation — views which are usually ignored by the Western-centric dominant forces behind worldwide legislation. This ‘opening up’ of worldwide legislation marks a shift the place International South nations, that haven’t traditionally been a part of such processes, make up the bulk, in what might show to be transformative not only for the court docket’s last AO  however for the observe and improvement of worldwide legislation for generations to come back.

In the meantime, outdoors the Courtroom, campaigners organized dynamic mobilizations, together with a Peoples’ Meeting, a unprecedented testomony to collective lived experiences, the result doc of which was submitted to the Court docket making certain peoples’ calls for for local weather justice have been formally on the file. The youth-led civil society marketing campaign additionally organized a sequence of different occasions — demonstrations, artwork exhibitions, museums, and cultural occasions — to help and complement the formal proceedings in an try to maximise inclusivity and participation. Using know-how through the Witness Stand marketing campaign, on-line petitions, coupled with complete social media and information protection of the hearings, all creatively rendered legally-heavy proceedings related and accessible to an entire new viewers. Maybe the largest reflection from these mobilizations is the truth that legislation and activism needn’t be separate silos. Within the ICJ AO proceedings, significant activism successfully dismantled the standard exclusivity and thriller surrounding authorized processes. The journey of democratizing worldwide legislation has now begun. 

By showing earlier than the ICJ, greater than 90 States made clear their perception within the rule of legislation and the legitimacy of the ICJ.  The ICJ, rising put up World Warfare II, on the heels of utter devastation, represents “the end result of a protracted means of growing strategies for the pacific settlement of worldwide disputes…” By way of institutional legitimacy, the Court docket has lengthy occupied a preeminent place. 

At a time when worldwide legislation and its establishments are intentionally being weakened, the forthcoming AO and its proceedings present the world a possibility to counter the rising tendencies of isolationism and rejection of multilateral cooperation, demonstrating how present mechanisms and processes will be reimagined to deal with among the greatest international challenges of our time. Whereas geopolitics might at the moment be in flux, “[u]bridled hegemonic energy” can’t be the best way: the response should be to strengthen the rule of legislation and internationalism.

The ICJ’s advisory opinion is predicted in 2025 and will present a authorized blueprint for holding main polluters accountable and affirming the correct to treatment and reparations. 

Alongside the advisory opinion from the Worldwide Tribunal for the Legislation of the Sea and the forthcoming one from the Inter-American Court docket of Human Rights, the ICJ’s opinion presents an unprecedented alternative to make clear States’ local weather obligations below worldwide legislation. The three opinions will must be learn collectively in alignment with the authorized mandate to harmonize States’ duties below worldwide legislation. Collectively, these opinions might reinforce the authorized obligation of States to quickly part out fossil fuels, defend human rights, and guarantee reparations for communities already affected by local weather disasters. 

An ICJ advisory opinion ⎯ that may draw on all related sources of worldwide legislation, and, on this occasion, has such deep engagement from a mess of States going through extreme local weather impacts⎯ offers an unmatched avenue to deal with the breadth and depth of points at stake. As an authoritative interpretation of binding legislation,  the ICJ AO might present vital steerage to States and courts, shaping future litigation, informing regional or cross-regional initiatives — for instance, on sovereignty and sea stage rise, or debt cancellation —  and nationwide stage insurance policies. The AO can also be anticipated to critically contribute to local weather negotiations, in addition to to developments in relation to the worldwide plastics treaty and the fossil gas non-proliferation treaty. 

The Broader Affect

Whatever the last consequence, these hearings have already modified the panorama of local weather legislation and justice. The overwhelming participation and the very alignment of International South nations in the midst of the ICJ local weather advisory proceedings, in addition to  the great management of these most affected by the local weather disaster, could possibly be transformative, driving future negotiations, circumstances, and coverage initiatives. The highly effective solidarity on show holds the potential to problem present energy dynamics and should contribute to ushering in a brand new period of multilateralism, one rooted in a decolonial imaginative and prescient of the rule of legislation, in addition to public and planetary well-being.

The struggle for local weather justice isn’t just taking place in courtrooms however in legislatures, negotiations, and our streets, led by actions demanding motion. The ICJ hearings have ignited momentum, however the true work lies forward: translating authorized discourse into real-world motion – and making certain main polluters are held accountable. 

Learn extra :