logo
Caribbean leaders hail ICJ climate ruling as ‘historic' win for small island states

Caribbean leaders hail ICJ climate ruling as ‘historic' win for small island states

The Guardian6 days ago
Leaders in the Caribbean have hailed the outcome of the international court of justice (ICJ) climate change case as a 'historic legal victory' for small island states everywhere.
Several countries in the region had provided evidence to the ICJ case, which ended this week with a landmark advisory opinion that could see states ordered to pay reparations if they fail to tackle fossil fuels and prevent harm to the climate system.
Describing the opinion as a 'historic legal victory for small states' that are bearing the worst impacts of climate change, the prime minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG), Ralph Gonsalves, told the Guardian it would strengthen the Caribbean's negotiating power.
'What is very interesting is that it says that the obligations laid out in the important [climate change] treaties are not simply procedural,' he said. 'They create substantive legal obligations.'
In recent years the Caribbean has been plagued by a string of catastrophic hurricanes. Last year Hurricane Beryl demolished more than 90% of buildings in parts of multi-island SVG and left thousands homeless and without running water, electricity and food.
Gonsalves said the advisory opinion – which said a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is a human right – connects climate action treaties such as the Paris agreement to other international laws such as those governing human rights.
Echoing Gonsalves' sentiments, the Bahamas' attorney general, Ryan Pinder, praised the ICJ for taking a 'very strong position' that allowed countries to 'speak and argue about the adverse effects of the climate crisis on its people' and potentially provided more legal options to small states.
'It certainly opens up the positions of … states like the Bahamas to go into other areas of the United Nations and other multilateral institutions that are human rights-focused,' he told the Guardian.
Referring to the catastrophic Hurricane Dorian in 2019, which killed more than 70 people and caused an estimated US$3.4bn worth of damage, Pinder said: '[This] had a significant impact on the human rights of our people, whether that be displacement … the right to an adequate standard of living … [or] access to food, water and housing.
'All of those are fundamental human rights that the ICJ has now recognised as a significant component of the adverse effects of climate change.'
The advisory opinion's focus on reparations, he said, was important for the Bahamas, because it was about the obligation of major polluters to restore a country and its assets if it suffered the effects of a climate change-related disaster.
Human rights and climate justice lawyer Nikki Reisch said it was possible to connect devastating climatic events to climate change and to the states responsible and pursue justice.
'The science on attribution and causation is strong and only getting stronger. The court made clear that there is no technical barrier to connecting climate destruction to its causes, to the continued pollution from fossil fuels and destruction of carbon sinks,' she said.
'The science is there, and this decision confirms that the law is too.'
Reisch added that countries were responsible for past and present environmental breaches.
'The court really rejected the attempts of the biggest cumulative emitters like the United States and others to sweep history under the rug and ignore the decades of climate destruction, of fossil fuel production and pollution, of colonialism that laid the foundations for the devastation that climate change is wreaking in so many parts of the world.'
In the UK, some MPs criticised the ICJ opinion, with the shadow foreign secretary, Priti Patel, describing it on X as a 'mad' decision, adding that the ICJ had 'lost its core purpose and is now joining political campaigns and bandwagons'.
Dr Justin Sobion, who coordinated the Caribbean's ICJ submissions, said the opinion was an interpretation of climate obligations under international law, including global agreements that countries such as the UK – which recognise there is a climate emergency – have ratified.
Pinder said: 'I'm not sure, given some of the commentary we've seen from larger developed countries and countries that were in the Industrial Revolution, that [the ICJ advisory] is really going to change their opinions.'
He added that the 'rather unfortunate' comments from some political leaders in the UK on the ICJ opinion indicated that 'multilateralism is still going to be a significant challenge'.
Pinder and Gonsalves said their countries were reviewing the ICJ opinion – which UN member states instructed the ICJ to produce in 2023 after years of campaigning by Pacific island law students and diplomacy led by Vanuatu – and considering how to work with other countries in the region on next steps.
'This has given us an excellent platform,' Gonsalves said. 'We have … to follow through with some heavy lifting, to do negotiations. At the end of the day, this is about life, living and production for all of us on planet Earth.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ukraine-Russia war latest: Kremlin says it is immune to sanctions after Trump's 10-day ultimatum to Putin
Ukraine-Russia war latest: Kremlin says it is immune to sanctions after Trump's 10-day ultimatum to Putin

The Independent

time3 hours ago

  • The Independent

Ukraine-Russia war latest: Kremlin says it is immune to sanctions after Trump's 10-day ultimatum to Putin

Russia has developed immunity to sanctions now after living under them for years, a senior Kremlin official said in response to US president Donald Trump 's 10-day ultimatum to agree to a ceasefire or face sanctions. 'We have been living under a huge number of sanctions for quite a long time, our economy operates under a huge number of restrictions,' Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said yesterday. The US president has warned Russia and said that Washington would start imposing punitive tariffs and other measures in 10 days if Moscow does not prepare to end its war in Ukraine. This comes as Ukraine has detained an air force officer on accusations of spying for Russia, who they said have leaked the location of F-16 and Mirage 2000 fighter jets. "In particular, the enemy's priority targets were airfields where F-16s, Mirage 2000s and Su-24s were based," Ukraine's domestic security agency said. Moscow regularly targets airfields and military bases across Ukraine, especially areas it believes are home to Western-provided weapons like the F-16 or Mirage jets.

Trump said he wanted to protect ‘Dreamer' immigrants with DACA. Now, officials say they should self-deport
Trump said he wanted to protect ‘Dreamer' immigrants with DACA. Now, officials say they should self-deport

The Independent

time7 hours ago

  • The Independent

Trump said he wanted to protect ‘Dreamer' immigrants with DACA. Now, officials say they should self-deport

The Trump administration is continuing to chip away at the guarantees of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which temporarily protects certain children brought to the U.S. illegally from deportation. The move comes despite the president's campaign-trail claim he wanted to protect DACA recipients, known as Dreamers. In response to questions about a recent case, in which DACA recipient Erick Hernandez accidentally drove across the U.S.-Mexico border from California in June without permission then was put in deportation proceedings, the Department of Homeland Security said it was encouraging Dreamers to self-deport. "Illegal aliens who claim to be recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) are not automatically protected from deportations," DHS assistant press secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement, encouraging Dreamers to accept the administration's $1,000 incentive to self-deport on a government-funded flight. "DACA does not confer any form of legal status in this country." Valerie Sigamani, an attorney for Hernandez, expressed alarm at the apparent immigration policy shift. 'This administration assured DACA recipients that something should be done to cement their status in the United States,' she told NBC San Diego. 'It's unfortunate that this DHS would encourage DACA recipients to self-deport.' Others argued the administration was not correctly applying the law regarding the DACA program, which was created in 2012 to protect immigrants who arrived illegally as children before 2007. "The notion that it does not provide protection is simply false," Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, told NPR, which first reported on the change in DACA priorities. President Trump has vacillated for years over the fate of the Dreamers, a group for whom a majority of Americans support creating some form of lasting residency or citizenship. DACA recipients, who receive work permits, currently have to re-apply for their protections every two years. During his first term, he tried to end the program, but the Supreme Court found in 2020 that the administration had not put forth an adequate justification to justify ending the initiative. As Trump plotted his political comeback, advisor Stephen Miller, now White House deputy chief of staff, told reporters in 2023 the president would try again to end the program. However, a year later, after winning the 2024 election, Trump seemed to flip again, telling NBC News that he wanted the Dreamers to stay in the country after all. 'They have great jobs,' he said on Meet The Press. 'In some cases, they have small businesses, some cases they might have large businesses. And we're going to have to do something with them.' 'I want to be able to work something out,' he added. Now that Trump is back in the White House, that priority seems to have evaporated, and agencies have moved to further restrict DACA recipients' access to the federal health insurance marketplace, while investigating universities that offered financial aid to Dreamers. Some immigrants with DACA have already chosen to self-deport, including Patricia Vázquez Topete, who came to the U.S. from Mexico at age 12, fleeing sexual abuse. 'I want people to understand that if we had a pathway, so many of us would have taken advantage of it,' said Topete, who left the U.S. in May, speaking with The Fresno Bee. 'We looked at the options, we are proactive, and we remain undocumented because there's still not an option.' ' The fate of DACA not the first time the president has wavered over the status of a sensitive category of immigrants. In June, the president conceded his mass deportation agenda was hurting the U.S. farm labor and hospitality labor force and reportedly planned a pause in enforcement against these sites while seeking some kind of reprieve, though immigration officials disagreed, and by July the president was saying there was no ' amnesty ' planned. 'We've got to give the farmers the people they need, but we're not talking amnesty,' Trump said earlier this month.

UN climate ruling ushers in fresh hopes of accountability
UN climate ruling ushers in fresh hopes of accountability

Times

time7 hours ago

  • Times

UN climate ruling ushers in fresh hopes of accountability

Companies may face tougher regulations in the wake of the UN court's landmark climate change ruling, but polluted states are likely to face an uphill battle for compensation. Environmental groups, small island nations and other climate change campaigners welcomed last week's 'advisory opinion' from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Netherlands, which said that countries were obliged under the climate change treaty regime and customary international law to protect the environment from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and limit global warming. States that breach these obligations may be required to cease their wrongful conduct, offer guarantees of non-repetition and pay compensation to those affected. The court affirmed that climate change is an urgent and existential threat that is 'unequivocally caused by human activities'. Giving the ruling, the court's president, Iwasawa Yuji, a judge from Japan, said that a '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'.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store