London, 23 July (Argus) — The International Court of Justice (ICJ) today determined in an advisory opinion that all countries have an obligation to contribute to cutting emissions, while advanced economies have further responsibilities to take the lead on addressing climate change.
The ICJ’s advisory opinions are not legally binding, but carry significant weight, and may contribute to the development of international law, the Centre for International Environmental Law (CIEL) said.
International climate treaties — such as the Paris Agreement — “establish stringent obligations upon states to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions”, the ICJ said today.
Countries “must fulfil their duty to prevent significant harm to the environment by acting with due diligence”, the ICJ said. It noted the discretion, built into UN climate body the UNFCCC, for nations to determine the means by which they cut emissions. But it was clear that “this discretion cannot serve as an excuse for states to refrain from co-operating with the required level of due diligence or to present their effort as an entirely voluntary contribution which cannot be subjected to scrutiny”.
The court noted the primary temperature goal set by the Paris Agreement — to limit the global rise in temperature to 1.5°C — and found that countries party to the agreement have an obligation to present national climate plans that align with this.
The ICJ also focused on the primary cause of GHGs — burning fossil fuels.
“Failure of a state to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from GHG emissions — including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies — may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that state”, the court found.
The issue was originally spearheaded by the small island state of Vanuatu, and led to a UN General Assembly request for the ICJ’s advisory opinion on states’ obligation to “ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for states and for present and future generations”. It also seeks the ICJ’s opinion on the legal consequences for states when they “by their acts and omissions, have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment”.
The outcome will “serve as definitive guidance from the world’s highest court”, environmental organisation ClientEarth told Argus last year.
The issues tackled by the court “concern an existential problem of planetary proportions that imperils all forms of life and the very health of our planet. International law… has an important but ultimately limited role in resolving this problem”, the ICJ said today.
The damage caused by climate change is growing, increasing pressure to define legal parameters and responsibilities. Weather and science agencies found that 2024 was the hottest year on record, smashing the record set in 2023.
By Georgia Gratton
