The past two weeks at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have been marked by historic hearings aimed at defining the international legal obligations of states in combating climate change. Over 100 countries and organizations participated in the proceedings between December 2 and 13, making this the most extensive legal case ever heard at The Hague.
The proceedings before the ICJ, which follow several significant court rulings concerning states’ obligations to prevent climate change, aim to establish a stronger framework of accountability that would clearly define states’ duties regarding climate protection.
This historic case began with a request from the UN General Assembly in March 2023, when the body asked the International Court of Justice to address the following key questions:
- What obligations do states have under international law to protect the climate system and other parts of the environment from greenhouse gas emissions caused by human activities, for both present and future generations?
- What are the legal consequences for states that, through their actions or omissions, cause significant harm to the climate system and the environment, particularly regarding:
- Other states, especially small island developing states, which are disproportionately affected due to their geographical locations and levels of development; and
- Peoples and individuals, both present and future generations, who suffer the harmful effects of climate change?
“The two weeks of oral hearings have presented a compelling legal argument, led by the Global South,” said Arnold Kiel Loughman, Vanuatu’s Attorney General. He emphasized that international environmental laws and fundamental human rights must be recognized as binding obligations for states in the context of climate change.
Arguments from Climate-Vulnerable Nations
Climate-vulnerable nations, including Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and other small island states, presented two key points: states’ duty to protect the climate and the consequences of actions or inactions that cause significant harm. Tuvalu, the first nation likely to be completely submerged due to rising sea levels, urged the court to consider how climate change undermines the right to self-determination.
Zambia’s representative delivered an emotional testimony, highlighting the devastating impact of climate change, including droughts that have nearly dried up Victoria Falls. Zambia, burdened by debt and limited resources, called for greater international support to address climate challenges.
Responses from European Nations
Among European states, France, Portugal, and Spain took a progressive stance, acknowledging the role of legal proceedings in achieving climate justice. France described the hearings as a critical opportunity to clarify international law on climate change. Conversely, the UK and Germany faced criticism for rejecting more ambitious climate obligations, arguing that the Paris Agreement already provides an adequate framework.
What’s Next?
The ICJ will now consider the arguments presented and deliver its advisory opinion in 2025. Although non-binding, the opinion is expected to significantly influence future climate lawsuits and policies worldwide.
As Loughman aptly noted: “In Vanuatu, we understand that a rising tide may lift all boats, but we need our boats lifted fast before our shores are permanently submerged”.