The 15 judges that make up the ICJ, the highest judicial body of the United Nations, described the need to face the threat of climate change as “urgent and existential”. Unanimously, they established that the signatories of various international agreements could violate international law if they do not adopt measures to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The sentence states that a “clean, healthy and sustainable environment” constitutes a human right. This interpretation raises the debate on the climate beyond the environmental or economic kingdom, positioning it as a question of justice and fundamental rights.
The change of focus could significantly influence future international and litigation legislation, making it easier to consider polluting countries responsible for the environmental damage they cause. Starting from June of this year, according to the More recent relationship From the Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the London environment, there were about 2,967 active causes of climate change in almost 60 countries, with over 226 new cases started in only 2024.
Yuji Iwasawa, president of ICJ, clarified that it is an advisory opinion, not a binding sentence. However, he expressed that the Court hopes that this declaration “inform and will guide a social and political action to face the ongoing climatic crisis”.
The case that led to this opinion was born in 2019, when a group of students from Vanuatu, a nation of the Pacific island particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, began to push for the inaction of the government on the climatic crisis to be legally recognized as an “existential risk”. Subsequently, Ralph Regenvanu, minister of climate change in the country, presented a formal complaint to the ICJ. In 2023, the United Nations General Assembly formalized the request for an advisory opinion of the Court.
The judges answered two key questions: what are the obligations of states pursuant to international law to protect the climatic system and the environment from greenhouse gas emissions? And what are the legal consequences for the countries that, by action or inaction, cause significant damage to the climate, in particular in relation to the states of the vulnerable island and to the generations present and future?
The analysis of the Court considered the provisions of international treaties such as the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Paris agreement, the Kyoto Protocol and the United Nations Convention on Climate Changes, among others.
ICJ’s evaluation concluded that states have a duty, “acting with due diligence and using all the means at their disposal”, to prevent activities in accordance with their jurisdiction or control by the environment.
Be First to Comment