Australia may be target of legal action on climate
The non-binding advisory opinion was issued by a 15-judge panel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague in The Netherlands overnight.
It opens the way for countries to potentially sue each other over climate change impacts.
Social justice group ActionAid Australia, which lobbies for women's rights, said the advice was a wake-up call for the Labor federal government.
"This ruling is a powerful tool we can use to demand that those most responsible for this climate crisis be held accountable," the group's Vanuatu country manager Flora Vano said on Thursday.
Ms Fino, who travelled to the Hague last year to deliver testimony as part of the court proceedings, said women and girls on the frontlines of the climate crisis will be able to fight for justice and accountability.
ActionAid Australia executive director Michelle Higelin said the ruling was clear.
"Australia must do all it can to keep global heating to 1.5 degrees," she said.
"This is not a choice, this is an obligation to take stronger and more urgent action."
ActionAid wants the government to "urgently" transition away from fossil fuels and increase funding to low-income countries, including those in the Pacific, to support climate adaptation efforts.
Global science and policy institute, Climate Analytics, which has an Australia-Pacific region office, said the court has pointed to potentially serious legal consequences.
Action could be taken under customary international law if countries don't put forward climate targets aligned to the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
"Importantly, these obligations also apply to countries whether or not they are Parties to the Paris Agreement," it added.
Australia's current commitment to the Paris Agreement includes reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 43 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
The world court's opinion comes after Vanuatu University law students argued that the people of Pacific island countries are unjustly bearing the brunt of climate change compared to high-emitting economies.
"The degradation of the climate system and of other parts of the environment impairs the enjoyment of a range of rights protected by human rights law," presiding judge Yuji Iwasawa said, reading out the court's opinion.
The court decision "confirms that states' obligations to protect human rights require taking measures to protect the climate system ... including mitigation and adaptation measures," judge Hilary Charlesworth, an Australian member of the court, said in a separate opinion.
The 133-page opinion was in response to two questions the United Nations General Assembly put to the UN court.
The first was: what are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate and environment from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions?
The second was: regarding the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have significantly harmed the climate and environment?
A response is being sought from the federal government.
Vanuatu Minister for Climate Change Adaptation Ralph Regenvanu described the court's opinion as a "very important course correction in this critically important time".
"For the first time in history, the ICJ has spoken directly about the biggest threat facing humanity," he said at The Hague.
Australia could become the subject of legal action after an international court said countries have an obligation to prevent climate change harm and redress damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
The non-binding advisory opinion was issued by a 15-judge panel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague in The Netherlands overnight.
It opens the way for countries to potentially sue each other over climate change impacts.
Social justice group ActionAid Australia, which lobbies for women's rights, said the advice was a wake-up call for the Labor federal government.
"This ruling is a powerful tool we can use to demand that those most responsible for this climate crisis be held accountable," the group's Vanuatu country manager Flora Vano said on Thursday.
Ms Fino, who travelled to the Hague last year to deliver testimony as part of the court proceedings, said women and girls on the frontlines of the climate crisis will be able to fight for justice and accountability.
ActionAid Australia executive director Michelle Higelin said the ruling was clear.
"Australia must do all it can to keep global heating to 1.5 degrees," she said.
"This is not a choice, this is an obligation to take stronger and more urgent action."
ActionAid wants the government to "urgently" transition away from fossil fuels and increase funding to low-income countries, including those in the Pacific, to support climate adaptation efforts.
Global science and policy institute, Climate Analytics, which has an Australia-Pacific region office, said the court has pointed to potentially serious legal consequences.
Action could be taken under customary international law if countries don't put forward climate targets aligned to the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
"Importantly, these obligations also apply to countries whether or not they are Parties to the Paris Agreement," it added.
Australia's current commitment to the Paris Agreement includes reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 43 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
The world court's opinion comes after Vanuatu University law students argued that the people of Pacific island countries are unjustly bearing the brunt of climate change compared to high-emitting economies.
"The degradation of the climate system and of other parts of the environment impairs the enjoyment of a range of rights protected by human rights law," presiding judge Yuji Iwasawa said, reading out the court's opinion.
The court decision "confirms that states' obligations to protect human rights require taking measures to protect the climate system ... including mitigation and adaptation measures," judge Hilary Charlesworth, an Australian member of the court, said in a separate opinion.
The 133-page opinion was in response to two questions the United Nations General Assembly put to the UN court.
The first was: what are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate and environment from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions?
The second was: regarding the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have significantly harmed the climate and environment?
A response is being sought from the federal government.
Vanuatu Minister for Climate Change Adaptation Ralph Regenvanu described the court's opinion as a "very important course correction in this critically important time".
"For the first time in history, the ICJ has spoken directly about the biggest threat facing humanity," he said at The Hague.
Australia could become the subject of legal action after an international court said countries have an obligation to prevent climate change harm and redress damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
The non-binding advisory opinion was issued by a 15-judge panel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague in The Netherlands overnight.
It opens the way for countries to potentially sue each other over climate change impacts.
Social justice group ActionAid Australia, which lobbies for women's rights, said the advice was a wake-up call for the Labor federal government.
"This ruling is a powerful tool we can use to demand that those most responsible for this climate crisis be held accountable," the group's Vanuatu country manager Flora Vano said on Thursday.
Ms Fino, who travelled to the Hague last year to deliver testimony as part of the court proceedings, said women and girls on the frontlines of the climate crisis will be able to fight for justice and accountability.
ActionAid Australia executive director Michelle Higelin said the ruling was clear.
"Australia must do all it can to keep global heating to 1.5 degrees," she said.
"This is not a choice, this is an obligation to take stronger and more urgent action."
ActionAid wants the government to "urgently" transition away from fossil fuels and increase funding to low-income countries, including those in the Pacific, to support climate adaptation efforts.
Global science and policy institute, Climate Analytics, which has an Australia-Pacific region office, said the court has pointed to potentially serious legal consequences.
Action could be taken under customary international law if countries don't put forward climate targets aligned to the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
"Importantly, these obligations also apply to countries whether or not they are Parties to the Paris Agreement," it added.
Australia's current commitment to the Paris Agreement includes reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 43 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
The world court's opinion comes after Vanuatu University law students argued that the people of Pacific island countries are unjustly bearing the brunt of climate change compared to high-emitting economies.
"The degradation of the climate system and of other parts of the environment impairs the enjoyment of a range of rights protected by human rights law," presiding judge Yuji Iwasawa said, reading out the court's opinion.
The court decision "confirms that states' obligations to protect human rights require taking measures to protect the climate system ... including mitigation and adaptation measures," judge Hilary Charlesworth, an Australian member of the court, said in a separate opinion.
The 133-page opinion was in response to two questions the United Nations General Assembly put to the UN court.
The first was: what are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate and environment from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions?
The second was: regarding the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have significantly harmed the climate and environment?
A response is being sought from the federal government.
Vanuatu Minister for Climate Change Adaptation Ralph Regenvanu described the court's opinion as a "very important course correction in this critically important time".
"For the first time in history, the ICJ has spoken directly about the biggest threat facing humanity," he said at The Hague.
Australia could become the subject of legal action after an international court said countries have an obligation to prevent climate change harm and redress damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
The non-binding advisory opinion was issued by a 15-judge panel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague in The Netherlands overnight.
It opens the way for countries to potentially sue each other over climate change impacts.
Social justice group ActionAid Australia, which lobbies for women's rights, said the advice was a wake-up call for the Labor federal government.
"This ruling is a powerful tool we can use to demand that those most responsible for this climate crisis be held accountable," the group's Vanuatu country manager Flora Vano said on Thursday.
Ms Fino, who travelled to the Hague last year to deliver testimony as part of the court proceedings, said women and girls on the frontlines of the climate crisis will be able to fight for justice and accountability.
ActionAid Australia executive director Michelle Higelin said the ruling was clear.
"Australia must do all it can to keep global heating to 1.5 degrees," she said.
"This is not a choice, this is an obligation to take stronger and more urgent action."
ActionAid wants the government to "urgently" transition away from fossil fuels and increase funding to low-income countries, including those in the Pacific, to support climate adaptation efforts.
Global science and policy institute, Climate Analytics, which has an Australia-Pacific region office, said the court has pointed to potentially serious legal consequences.
Action could be taken under customary international law if countries don't put forward climate targets aligned to the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
"Importantly, these obligations also apply to countries whether or not they are Parties to the Paris Agreement," it added.
Australia's current commitment to the Paris Agreement includes reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 43 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
The world court's opinion comes after Vanuatu University law students argued that the people of Pacific island countries are unjustly bearing the brunt of climate change compared to high-emitting economies.
"The degradation of the climate system and of other parts of the environment impairs the enjoyment of a range of rights protected by human rights law," presiding judge Yuji Iwasawa said, reading out the court's opinion.
The court decision "confirms that states' obligations to protect human rights require taking measures to protect the climate system ... including mitigation and adaptation measures," judge Hilary Charlesworth, an Australian member of the court, said in a separate opinion.
The 133-page opinion was in response to two questions the United Nations General Assembly put to the UN court.
The first was: what are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate and environment from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions?
The second was: regarding the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have significantly harmed the climate and environment?
A response is being sought from the federal government.
Vanuatu Minister for Climate Change Adaptation Ralph Regenvanu described the court's opinion as a "very important course correction in this critically important time".
"For the first time in history, the ICJ has spoken directly about the biggest threat facing humanity," he said at The Hague.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
33 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Australia news LIVE: Trump envoy meets Putin in Moscow; Indian tariffs doubled amid US push for Ukraine ceasefire
Latest posts Latest posts 6.55am A super-sized GST – with a $3300 cheque in the mail By Shane Wright, Paul Sakkal and Olivia Ireland All Australians would receive $3300 a year in exchange for accepting a higher and broader GST under a plan which proponents claim would boost the budget by $28 billion a year while driving up the nation's living standards. Before this month's economic roundtable, independent MP Kate Chaney has backed an idea first floated by leading Australian economist Richard Holden to lift the GST to 15 per cent and extend the tax on food, education, health and childcare services and water and sewerage. This would raise an additional $92.5 billion in its first full year of operation, but would be offset by a $3300 rebate to every person over the age of 18 that would effectively erase the impact of the higher GST on the first $22,000 of an individual's annual purchases. 6.52am US Army sergeant shoots five Soldiers at Georgia base An Army sergeant using a personal handgun opened fire on his unit at Fort Stewart-Hunter Army Airfield in Georgia on Wednesday, the base's commander said. Five soldiers were wounded in the attack, which ended when soldiers tackled the gunman. None of the injuries were life-threatening, base commander John W. Lubas said in a news conference. He said the victims would not be identified publicly until their families had been contacted. 'All are expected to recover,' he said. Army officials identified the suspect in custody as Sergeant Quornelius Radford, 28, an automated logistics sergeant assigned to 2nd Brigade Combat Team. They said they were not sure of his motivations or how he had concealed the weapon he used. About 8,800 people live at Fort Stewart, about 40 miles southwest of Savannah. The Army Criminal Investigation Division was leading the investigation of the shooting. President Donald Trump was briefed, said Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, and the FBI's Savannah office was assisting the investigation. The New York Times 6.45am What's making news today By Daniel Lo Surdo Hello and welcome to the national news live blog. My name is Daniel Lo Surdo, and I'll be helming our live coverage this morning. Here's what is making news today: White House special envoy Steve Witkoff met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow hours ago, in an almost three-hour meeting that canvassed Donald Trump's threat to intensify sanctions and tariffs on Russia if an urgent move towards a ceasefire with Ukraine wasn't achieved. Trump described the meeting as 'highly productive', noting that 'great progress was made' towards ending Russia's war in Ukraine. A proposal that would see all Australians receive $3300 a year in exchange for accepting a higher and broader GST has been proposed ahead of this month's economic reform roundtable. The plan would lift the GST to 15 per cent and extend the tax on food, education, health and childcare services, and water and sewerage, with proponents arguing it would boost the budget by $28 billion a year and drive up national living standards. Trump has signed an executive order to double tariffs on Indian exports to 50 per cent within three weeks, days after the Indian government warned against new trade penalties. The move is designed to penalise India for its purchasing of Russian oil, as Trump continues work to negotiate an end to Russia's war in Ukraine.
The Age
33 minutes ago
- The Age
Australia news LIVE: Trump envoy meets Putin in Moscow; Indian tariffs doubled amid US push for Ukraine ceasefire
Latest posts Latest posts 6.55am A super-sized GST – with a $3300 cheque in the mail By Shane Wright, Paul Sakkal and Olivia Ireland All Australians would receive $3300 a year in exchange for accepting a higher and broader GST under a plan which proponents claim would boost the budget by $28 billion a year while driving up the nation's living standards. Before this month's economic roundtable, independent MP Kate Chaney has backed an idea first floated by leading Australian economist Richard Holden to lift the GST to 15 per cent and extend the tax on food, education, health and childcare services and water and sewerage. This would raise an additional $92.5 billion in its first full year of operation, but would be offset by a $3300 rebate to every person over the age of 18 that would effectively erase the impact of the higher GST on the first $22,000 of an individual's annual purchases. 6.52am US Army sergeant shoots five Soldiers at Georgia base An Army sergeant using a personal handgun opened fire on his unit at Fort Stewart-Hunter Army Airfield in Georgia on Wednesday, the base's commander said. Five soldiers were wounded in the attack, which ended when soldiers tackled the gunman. None of the injuries were life-threatening, base commander John W. Lubas said in a news conference. He said the victims would not be identified publicly until their families had been contacted. 'All are expected to recover,' he said. Army officials identified the suspect in custody as Sergeant Quornelius Radford, 28, an automated logistics sergeant assigned to 2nd Brigade Combat Team. They said they were not sure of his motivations or how he had concealed the weapon he used. About 8,800 people live at Fort Stewart, about 40 miles southwest of Savannah. The Army Criminal Investigation Division was leading the investigation of the shooting. President Donald Trump was briefed, said Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, and the FBI's Savannah office was assisting the investigation. The New York Times 6.45am What's making news today By Daniel Lo Surdo Hello and welcome to the national news live blog. My name is Daniel Lo Surdo, and I'll be helming our live coverage this morning. Here's what is making news today: White House special envoy Steve Witkoff met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow hours ago, in an almost three-hour meeting that canvassed Donald Trump's threat to intensify sanctions and tariffs on Russia if an urgent move towards a ceasefire with Ukraine wasn't achieved. Trump described the meeting as 'highly productive', noting that 'great progress was made' towards ending Russia's war in Ukraine. A proposal that would see all Australians receive $3300 a year in exchange for accepting a higher and broader GST has been proposed ahead of this month's economic reform roundtable. The plan would lift the GST to 15 per cent and extend the tax on food, education, health and childcare services, and water and sewerage, with proponents arguing it would boost the budget by $28 billion a year and drive up national living standards. Trump has signed an executive order to double tariffs on Indian exports to 50 per cent within three weeks, days after the Indian government warned against new trade penalties. The move is designed to penalise India for its purchasing of Russian oil, as Trump continues work to negotiate an end to Russia's war in Ukraine.
ABC News
33 minutes ago
- ABC News
The aggressive courting of Tasmania's crossbench MPs is heating up with two weeks until fresh no-confidence motion
After weeks of uncertainty, Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliff's bid to be recommissioned for another term was endorsed by the state's governor on Wednesday morning. The decision led to bookmakers paying out on bets for the election, and plenty of big grins from Mr Rockliff. And he's been hard at work finalising a shake-up to his cabinet that could be announced as soon as Thursday morning. But things aren't as finite as they seem. In just two weeks, state parliament will be recalled. And Labor leader Dean Winter has confirmed Mr Rockliff's government will face a motion of no-confidence when that happens, barely two months after a successful no-confidence motion triggered July 19's snap state election. So how can it be the case that after an election that was supposed to resolve all the uncertainty, we're back here again? Firstly, the 2025 election no-one really wanted delivered an eerily similar parliament to the one elected a year before. In 2024, there were 14 Liberals, 10 Labor MPs, five Greens and six other crossbenchers — three Jacqui Lambie Network MPs and three independents. This time around, there were again 14 Liberals, 10 from Labor and five from the Greens, and six others on the crossbench. The only real change is that there are five independents, and one Shooters, Fishers and Farmers MP. The Liberals are still in minority and the tensions that existed before the election — about a lack of transparency from the government, concerns about its handling of big projects and the budget — are still very live. Also, unlike last year's election, where Mr Rockliff's reaction to winning just 14 seats was to immediately move to secure four confidence and supply agreements in a bid to deliver stability, this time he hasn't tried. He's argued the agreements are good, but not necessary. Then there's the matter that at least 19 of the 35 lower house MPs are either Labor MPs or from the progressive side of politics — the five Greens and independents David O'Byrne, Peter George, Kristie Johnston and Craig Garland. That, plus the lack of confidence and supply agreements, has opened the door for Labor, who didn't try to govern after the last election in 2024 or two months ago following the successful no-confidence motion it moved to step up negotiations with the crossbench. That's the other huge difference to what unfolded two months ago. Labor is actively trying to form a minority government of its own, despite winning just 10 seats. To do that, it needs the support of the Greens, plus at least three other crossbenchers. So there are two parties trying to win over the six non-Green members of the crossbench, and only one of them has picked a side, with independent MP Craig Garland saying he'll vote for a no-confidence motion and support the formation of a Labor government. It means those five other crossbenchers — including three entirely new to parliament in independents Peter George and George Razay and Shooters, Fishers and Farmers MP Carlo Di Falco — have less than two weeks to decide if they want to depose Mr Rockliff and install a government led by Mr Winter instead. They're all being aggressively courted by the Liberals and Labor, who will meet with all six on Thursday. In her decision published on the Government House website, Governor Baker said Mr Rockliff's incumbency meant he had the right to remain in office until parliament decided whether it had confidence in him. And with Tasmania's constitution requiring premiers and ministers to be commissioned within seven days of the election writs being delivered, Governor Baker says she could not afford to wait for a parliamentary vote. "I consider myself bound to make an appointment within that period, because the state must not be without a government," Governor Baker said. But the return date of August 19, much sooner than some were expecting, means that the political uncertainty won't last for too much longer. Within two weeks, Tasmanians will have an answer to the question an election couldn't solve: Who's going to be the state's next long-term premier? Both sides have mounted arguments about why it should be them. But the biggest task now sits with Mr Winter, who sat at the helm while his party suffered a 3.1 per cent statewide swing against it and failed to win a quota in his own right in the seat of Franklin. He's got to make Tasmanians understand why the parliament is again debating kicking out a premier who received more than two quotas in his seat of Braddon. And convince people that this time, a no-confidence motion is a positive move to install a Labor government, not a negative tactic to oust a popular premier when he's got no plan to lead the state himself. And he's got to convince the crossbench, including a Greens party he's at least publicly ignoring, that he's the right man to lead the state, despite his party being rejected at the election. And convince them to risk facing public backlash and support a no-confidence motion, knowing full well all the commentary that doing so will lead to. Despite the governor's decision, Tasmanian politics is still extremely turbulent. And there will be huge consequences for the party, and the leader, caught on the wrong side of the power play that's still got weeks to unfold.
