Landmark ICJ verdict on climate change: Inaction by nations is illegal; reparations possible
United Nations's top court has said that inaction on climate change could be unlawful. The
international court of justice
(ICJ) said on Wednesday that countries may be breaching international law if they fail to take meaningful steps to protect the climate.
It also opened the door for reparations to countries already affected by the crisis.
Court president Yuji Iwasawa called the climate emergency 'an existential problem of planetary proportions' and warned that ignoring it could amount to a 'wrongful act' under international law. Activists celebrated outside the court.
The case was led by the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu and supported by more than 130 countries. After years of pressure from vulnerable island states, the UN general assembly had asked the ICJ in 2023 to give its opinion. A panel of 15 judges answered two key questions: what are states legally required to do to protect the environment, and what happens if they don't?
The court's opinion, over 500 pages long, said that every person has a right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment.
It's a human right. The statement alone could be used in domestic and international courts. Experts say this could shape future lawsuits, investment treaties, and even climate policies.
Vanuatu's attorney general reminded judges that his people's survival was at stake. Sea levels in parts of the Pacific were rising faster than the global average. Global temperatures have already increased by 1.3°C since pre-industrial times.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
No annual fees for life
UnionBank Credit Card
Apply Now
Undo
UN's top court says failing to tackle climate change 'could violate international law'
Some countries, like the US and Russia, have opposed any court-mandated emission cuts. But ICJ's opinion adds to growing legal pressure.
Earlier this month, the Inter-American court of
human rights
ruled that countries must avoid environmental harm and restore damaged ecosystems. Last year, the European court of human rights made a similar call.
In 2019, the Dutch supreme court became the first to link climate change and human rights, ruling the government must protect citizens from its effects.
Though the ICJ ruling is not legally binding, it marks a significant shift in climate law. The court itself admitted that law alone cannot solve the crisis, but said it plays an 'important' role in shaping global responsibility.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
a few seconds ago
- Time of India
Days of building China factories, hiring workers in India are over: US President Donald Trump
Synopsis This comes on the heels of the US releasing an AI Action Plan, which includes plans for export controls, to shore up American dominance in the global AI race and prevent 'adversaries' from getting their hands on critical AI technology. Experts said while India may emerge as a key partner for the US, the larger focus on domestic production in America and possible disruptions in global AI supply chains mean India should also focus on building up its own capabilities.
India.com
a few seconds ago
- India.com
War Must End: Macron Drops Diplomatic Bombshell, France To Recognise Palestine
Paris: A shift in European diplomacy is taking shape. French President Emmanuel Macron has declared that France will officially recognise Palestine as a sovereign state. He says will make an announcement in this regard at the United Nations General Assembly in September. In a message shared on his official social X handle, Macron laid out the urgency. 'The war in Gaza must stop. The civilian population must be protected. There must be an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages and a massive humanitarian aid effort for the people of Gaza,' he said. His statement further read, 'Hamas must be demilitarised, Gaza secured and rebuilt. We must finally build the State of Palestine, ensure its viability and, by accepting its demilitarisation and full recognition of Israel, allow it to contribute to the security of all in the region.' There is no alternative. The French people want peace in the Middle East. It is up to us, French, Israelis, Palestinians and our European and international partners, to show that it is possible.' With visible emotion, he said the decision is rooted in France's long-standing values. 'Peace is possible. And France, true to its historic role, will take this step in support of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East,' he posts. Fidèle à son engagement historique pour une paix juste et durable au Proche-Orient, j'ai décidé que la France reconnaîtra l'État de Palestine. J'en ferai l'annonce solennelle à l'Assemblée générale des Nations unies, au mois de septembre prochain.… — Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) July 24, 2025 Sources familiar with the discussions say Macron's government has been deliberating this recognition for months, but the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza and the global outrage it has sparked compelled him to act now. For Palestinians, the announcement hit like a thunderclap. Mahmoud Abbas, the head of the Palestinian Authority, received a formal letter from Macron outlining France's intent. The response came swiftly through his top official Hussein al-Sheikh, who welcomed the move as 'a reaffirmation of France's faith in international law and the rights of our people to self-determination'. He said the recognition would strengthen efforts to establish a sovereign Palestinian state. Observers see this as the most significant diplomatic endorsement for Palestinian statehood in years. Over 130 countries, primarily across Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Arab world, have already recognised Palestine. But France's entry into this camp carries outsized weight. It is the first G7 member and the most powerful European Union (EU) country to openly align itself with the Palestinian cause in this way. Inside Israel, Macron's decision has not gone down well. Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Minister Yariv Levin issued a condemnation, branding the recognition 'a stain on France's history'. He went even further, warning that it emboldens what he called 'terrorism' and urging Israel to move toward annexation of the West Bank. The timing of the French move appears significant. Just days earlier, the United States abruptly walked away from ceasefire negotiations in Qatar, blaming Hamas for stonewalling. Macron's recognition announcement also lands amid accusations that Israel is restricting humanitarian aid to Gaza and allowing Palestinians to die while scrambling for food. France itself stands at a sensitive crossroads. With the largest Jewish and Muslim populations in Western Europe, the country often finds itself caught in the domestic crosswinds of any Middle East conflict. Macron's administration is bracing for backlash at home, but believes the moral and diplomatic weight of the move is worth the cost. At the United Nations, Macron's foreign minister is set to co-chair a high-stakes conference next week to revive the two-state solution, a framework that has floundered in recent years. The French president has made it clear that recognition of Palestine will not come at the expense of Israel's security. But he insists that lasting peace cannot be achieved while the Palestinian question remains unresolved. The territories at the centre of this recognition, Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, were captured by Israel in the 1967 war. East Jerusalem was annexed soon after, while sprawling settlements took root across the West Bank. Over half a million Israeli settlers now live there, alongside about three million Palestinians under varying degrees of military control. The Palestinian Authority holds limited autonomy in parts of the West Bank, but sovereignty has remained elusive. Macron's announcement has jolted a stagnant diplomatic scene and revived momentum for the two-state vision. With France stepping forward, attention now turns to how other Western powers respond and whether they, too, will follow suit.
The Hindu
30 minutes ago
- The Hindu
‘Civil society globally did a fantastic job in supporting Gaza; but governments in West are evil'
After his two-storey house in Gaza was bombed in October 2023, allegedly by Israeli forces, Palestinian human rights lawyer Raji Sourani remains committed to returning to the war-torn strip; one of his first priorities, he says. In an exclusive interview, Mr. Sourani, who founded the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) in 1995, shares the current scenario of his and his organisation's efforts to prosecute Israel for 'genocide' at the International Court of Justice. Mr. Sournai, who is currently in Cairo, Egypt, expressed severe disappointment with Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), adding that Mr. Khan had 'failed' the people of Gaza. It is to note that, since 2015, Sourani has led the Palestinian legal team representing victims at the ICC. In a conversation with Al-Jazeera in April 2024, it was mentioned that you and a team of lawyers from the PCHR were working on prosecuting Israel for 'genocide' at the ICJ. Where does this stand in the present-day? The ICJ, as you know, is a court for the states. Since January 2015, we have been trying our best and have invested in making a case move at the ICC. But, there was an incredible amount of political pressure from the U.S., especially from the then Donald Trump-led administration. Penalties were warned on anyone who would try to bring the U.S. or Israel to the ICC, at any political level. This lasted till March 2021, when the ICC chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, decided to open an investigation. However, when Karim Khan took over as the new chief prosecutor of the ICC, he did not move anywhere. If I may interrupt, can you elaborate on why things did not move after Karim Khan took over? We do not know, but he was talking about restructuring the court, and the investigation into Palestine and budget deficits, among others. His priorities were very confusing to us, and he refused to meet us, even in principle, for a long period of time. When the October 7, 2023, attacks took place in Israel, we tried to meet Khan on numerous occasions. He already had the decision made by Fatou Bensouda to go ahead with the investigation. All Khan had to do was to ensure the investigation went ahead, but he did not do that. He continued to refuse a meeting with us, including with his investigative team. That is when we decided to think of the ICJ, and to open the dialogue channels with Ireland and South Africa, and the latter was open to the idea. We were lucky that South Africa…took over the case at the ICJ and challenged Israel while accusing the latter of the most serious crime of genocide. Coming back to Karim Khan, there has been recent news that he was reportedly warned to be 'destroyed', along with the ICC, if the arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant were not withdrawn. As a human rights lawyer, how do you perceive this? Despite the first Trump-led administration deciding that it would sanction anyone who tried to demand accountability [from the U.S. or Israel], Bensouda was incredibly courageous to challenge that. She formed the investigative body and had a meeting with us, and the investigation was simply supposed to proceed. We have documented war crimes dating back to 2014 – including crimes against humanity and persecution. However, after Khan took over, he refused to meet. It is very strange that a prosecutor, and his team, who cannot visit the place [Gaza], had no interest in meeting the lawyers who had documentation of the situation. Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine erupted. Soon after, he opened an office in Kyiv and began the investigation in Ukraine with 37 investigators. But, he did not move with respect to our file. We warned them [Khan and his team] after the October 7th attacks that there is obvious evidence of plans to carry out a genocide in Gaza. Still, they did not want to meet or listen. Only after making the case at the ICJ did Khan ask to meet us, and we were reluctant. I told Khan that he was partly responsible for the blood, pain and suffering of Gaza, after October 7th. Maybe if Khan had held any Israelis accountable, according to the files he had, then they [Israel] would not have thought of doing genocide. He promised to move forward, but only after he went to Israel and met the Israeli victims… Later, he delivered the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, but is that enough? These warrants are related to starvation and food, and not to genocide. Do you feel that Karim has failed you [and the people of Gaza]? Definitely. By waiting two years after taking over [to initiate action], he failed us… I do not want more than what he did for Ukraine. In one year, he had a warrant against Putin. I am damn sure that if Israel had been informed that they could be held accountable, they would have thought many times before doing what they are doing now… This is the most well-documented conflict in history, this is a genocide that was broadcast and live-streamed, and the world has been watching it? Speaking of war crimes, do you feel that the world and the media has turned its back on Gaza? I think the civil society, globally, did a fantastic job on [supporting] Gaza. I am very proud that the crème-de-la-crème of American universities and the generation of tomorrow stood fair, and they tried their best to voice the voiceless. They were able to speak truth to power. This includes people in London, Tokyo, Delhi and Paris, among others. It is obvious, the solidarity and support for Palestine. Our problem is not with the people…but the government's, in the U.S. and Europe, are evil. How can they support a criminal, belligerent occupation, and call a genocide a right to self-defence? I am appalled, the behaviour is selective. I also noticed that you were no longer based in Gaza, a place that you were not willing to leave at any cost. What made you leave Gaza? I did not leave Gaza willingly, my house was bombed. I have been a lawyer for the last 43 years, and one of my missions is to document these war crimes. I was checking whether the targeting against me was deliberate or not. My colleagues and I concluded that yes, this was deliberate. I was advised by my friends from across the world not to stay a minute longer in Gaza, because they believed that targeting was deliberate. They said that nobody will make use of you if you are dead. On the other hand, my wife and son refused to separate from me and leave for Egypt. At that time, it was 'mission impossible' to leave Gaza. But some friends intervened and got me out of there. For the first time, I feel that I am not in the right place [because I am away from Gaza]. You did mention that you had proper documentation of the alleged war crimes. Can you walk us through the testimonies of the victims, which you have gathered? We have had a real dilemma since the latest war broke out, because we never used to document anything partly. I can assure you that whether it's in 2008, 2009, 2012, 2014, 2017 and more, we have documented every war crime – crimes against humanity, persecution – in full. But, in this war, it was 'mission impossible' to document everything. Firstly, it was extremely dangerous, so I asked everyone in my team to stay home. We decided to do selective documentation, what that means is that we had to be selective in how many places we could cover. But wherever we covered, we did it in full. We documented attacks against shelters, UNRWA schools and hundreds of people have been killed, among many other war crimes. We have major samples on every type of crime that was committed. Do you ever plan to return to Gaza, given that there is an alleged threat to your life? Definitely, that is the first thing on my agenda. I am a deep-rooted Gazan, my family has lived in Gaza for the last seven centuries. I chose to be in Gaza, even when I was offered work in places across the world. I know that Gaza is not the most beautiful place in the world, but that is where I belong and feel my humanity. And there is a cause and case that I am working for. I have a team in Gaza, 45 of them, they continue to document starvation, bombings, killings and displacement. We have lost three of our staff members so far, and many of our staff members have also lost their family members… Not a for second will I comprise on returning to Gaza, no matter what the price will be.
