
International Court of Justice to deliver landmark climate ruling
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been tasked with crafting a so-called advisory opinion on countries' obligations to prevent climate change and the consequences for polluters whose emissions have harmed the planet.
Experts say this is the most significant in a string of recent rulings on climate change in international law, with major potential repercussions for states and firms around the world.
Climate-vulnerable countries and campaign groups hope it will have far-reaching legal consequences in the fight against climate change, unifying existing law, shaping national and international legislation, and impacting current court cases.
'It will be the compass the world needs to course correct,' said Vishal Prasad, director of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change.
'It will give new strength to climate litigation, inspire more ambitious national policies and guide states toward decisions that uphold their legal duties to protect both people and planet,' said Prasad.
But some critics argue the ruling will be toothless, as ICJ advisory opinions are not binding and major polluters can choose simply to ignore it.
The UN, pushed by tiny island state Vanuatu, asked the court to answer two questions.
First, what obligations do states have under international law to protect the Earth's climate from polluting greenhouse gas emissions?
Second, what are the legal consequences for states which 'by their acts and omissions have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment?'
The second question was explicitly linked to the damage that climate change is causing to small, more vulnerable, countries and their populations.
This applies to countries facing increasingly damaging weather disasters and especially to island nations under threat from rising sea levels like those in the Pacific Ocean.
In what was termed a 'David versus Goliath' battle, advanced economies and developing nations clashed at the ICJ during December hearings on the case.
The iconic Peace Palace in the Hague, the seat of the ICJ, played host to more than 100 oral submissions — the largest number ever, many from tiny states making their first appearance.
'This may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity,' said Vanuatu's representative Ralph Regenvanu, opening the two weeks of hearings.
'The outcome of these proceedings will reverberate across generations, determining the fate of nations like mine and the future of our planet,' he told the 15-judge panel.
Major polluters argued the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was sufficient and new guidelines on countries' obligations were not necessary.
US representative Margaret Taylor said this framework was 'the most current expression of states' consent to be bound by international law in respect of climate change.'
Taylor urged the court 'to ensure its opinion preserves and promotes the centrality of this regime.'
Meanwhile, the speaker from India was even more explicit.
'The court should avoid the creation of any new or additional obligations beyond those already existing under the climate change regime,' said Luther Rangreji.
The United States under President Donald Trump has since pulled funding for the UNFCCC and withdrawn from its landmark pact, the Paris climate agreement.
But smaller states said this framework was inadequate to mitigate climate change's devastating effects.
'As seas rise faster than predicted, these states must stop.
'This court must not permit them to condemn our lands and our people to watery graves,' said John Silk from the Marshall Islands.
After bitterly fought UN climate talks in Azerbaijan in November, wealthy countries agreed to provide at least $300 billion a year by 2035 to help developing nations transition to clean energy and prepare for an increase in extreme weather.
The vulnerable nations argued this is simply not enough and urged the ICJ to push for more.
'This is a crisis of survival. It is also a crisis of equity,' said Fiji's representative Luke Daunivalu.
'Our people... are unfairly and unjustly footing the bill for a crisis they did not create.
'They look to this court for clarity, for decisiveness and justice.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Arab News
25 minutes ago
- Arab News
Hamas must surrender Gaza control, disarm: Palestinian PM
Palestinian prime minister Mohammad Mustafa said Monday that Hamas must disarm and give up control of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority to restore security in the war-torn territory. 'Israel must withdraw completely from the Gaza Strip and Hamas must relinquish its control over the strip and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority,' Mustafa said at a conference on the two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians at the United Nations in New York.


Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
EU defends Trump trade deal as critics call it a ‘capitulation'
In this episode of W News Extra, presented by Jono Hayes, we cover a range of stories, including the newly struck trade deal between the United States and the European Union. The EU is defending the agreement with President Donald Trump amid sharp divisions among European capitals and business leaders, with some critics calling the deal a 'capitulation.' Guests: Michael Jabri-Pickett Lubna Hamdan

Al Arabiya
2 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
US urges UN Security Council to ease Syria sanctions to aid fight against terrorism
The United States urged the United Nations Security Council on Monday to adjust its sanctions on Syria to help the country's government prevail in what the acting US ambassador described as 'the fight against terrorism.' After 13 years of civil war, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad was ousted in December in a lightning offensive by opposition forces led by the 'Hayat Tahrir al-Sham' (HTS) group. Formerly known as the al-Nusra Front, HTS was al-Qaeda's official wing in Syria until breaking ties in 2016. Since May 2014, the group has been on the United Nations Security Council's al-Qaeda and ISIS sanctions list and subjected to a global asset freeze and arms embargo. A number of HTS members are also under UN sanctions – a travel ban, asset freeze and arms embargo – including its leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, who is now Syria's president. The United States is working with Security Council members to review Syria-related sanctions, acting US Ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea said on Monday. 'The Syrian government has made a clear commitment to combat al-Qaeda and (ISIS), and both groups are equally clear that they oppose the new government and are threatening to destroy it. Council members should not take those threats lightly,' she told a Security Council meeting on Syria. 'The Council can – and must – adjust its sanctions so the Syrian government can prevail in the fight against terrorism, while keeping the most dangerous and unrepentant actors designated,' she said. US President Donald Trump announced a major US policy shift in May when he said he would lift US sanctions on Syria. United Nations sanctions monitors have seen no 'active ties' this year between al-Qaeda and Syria's new government, according to an unpublished UN report, a finding that could strengthen the US push to ease some UN sanctions on Syria.