ICJ Advisory Opinion On Climate Change
'The Advisory Opinion is incredibly significant. It is a defining moment for climate litigation and state responsibility on climate change', says Jessica Palairet, Executive Director of Lawyers for Climate Action NZ Inc.
'The 133-page judgment of the United Nations' top court found that:
Greenhouse gas emissions have unequivocally caused climate change, which is an existential threat.
States have legal duties to reduce emissions and regulate businesses' climate impacts.
Granting fossil fuel exploration licenses or providing fossil fuel subsidies may constitute a breach of international law.
States have to act in line with limiting warming to 1.5°C - not 2°C. States have to exercise due diligence and do everything possible to avoid causing significant harm to the climate system.
States' obligations on climate change extend beyond climate treaties, also encompassing many other areas of international law, including human rights law, environmental law, and laws restricting cross-border harms.'
'The Advisory Opinion is non-binding, but it carries significant legal and moral weight. It provides an authoritative statement on states' obligations under international law that will be used by courts around the world, including in New Zealand, as they ask whether governments are meeting their legal obligations', says Palairet.
'In New Zealand, the Advisory Opinion is also of particular importance given our Free Trade Agreements with the European Union and United Kingdom require us to effectively implement the Paris Agreement. The Advisory Opinion provides greater clarity on what effectively implementing the Paris Agreement entails'.
'This Advisory Opinion provides a beacon of hope at a time when we are witnessing both the devastating impacts of climate change and backsliding from many countries, including New Zealand.'
'Our Government is set to make a series of important decisions on climate change in the coming weeks, including whether to cut our 2050 biogenic methane target to 14%. This judgment calls into question whether such a decision would be consistent with our international obligations, which require us to aim to limit warming to 1.5°C'.
'It also raises sharp questions around the Government's repeal of the ban on offshore oil and gas exploration, and recent announcement that it will provide $200m in co-investment for new gas fields. The ICJ has now made clear that this could constitute a breach of international law'.
'Today's opinion would not be here without the work of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, and the support of Pacific Island states, including Vanuatu. It is an incredible story of Pacific leadership on the world stage.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
The 109-year-old pact that looms over European moves to recognise a Palestinian state
To many Arabs, who view it as a great betrayal, it seeded a legacy of strife and bloodshed in the Middle East. The real-time crisis unfolding in the Gaza Strip — the starving children, the Israeli restrictions on aid, the Palestinians killed as they try to collect food — undoubtedly had a greater impact on Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain and President Emmanuel Macron of France than the stains of the past. Yet their momentous decisions have cast a light on the shadowy roles of both countries in a region where they once vied for influence. 'The history is so relevant,' said Eugene L. Rogan, a professor of modern Middle Eastern history at the University of Oxford in England. 'It shows there's always a chance for historical actors who screwed up in the past to make up for their mistakes.' Rogan praised the moves towards recognition for reasons both past and present. On its current course, he said, Israel was opening the door to unthinkable treatment of the Palestinians: expulsion from Gaza or worse. Recognising a Palestinian state does Israel a favour by opening the way to 'a form of cohabitation that is sustainable', he said. Speaking at the United Nations, the British Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, cited another century-old document in arguing that recognition would redress a historical injustice: the Balfour Declaration, issued a year after the signing of Sykes-Picot, which endorsed 'the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'. It had a proviso that 'nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine'. After 21 months of relentless Israeli attacks in Gaza, with the spectre of famine across the enclave, Lammy said that Britain had a responsibility to act on behalf of the territory's long-oppressed Palestinian population. 'His argument is that it's time to make good on the second half of that promise,' said Rogan, whose books include The Arabs: A History. 'At the time of the Balfour had a worldwide empire, which in 1917, they could not imagine losing. David Lammy is operating in a postcolonial, post-EU Britain. But he's using history as a legitimating factor.' Lammy said that Britain could be proud that it 'helped lay the foundations for a homeland for the Jewish people'. Yet the country's motive in backing what later became Israel was less moral than strategic, Rogan said. It was seeking a client community in Palestine that would prevent the territory from falling into enemy hands. London feared the territory could be used as a launchpad for attacks on the Suez Canal, which was then controlled by Britain. Moreover, Britain backed away from its pro-Zionist stance as it found it hard to reconcile a Jewish state with preserving relations with the Arab world. In a later document, the White Paper of 1939, Britain proposed that the Jewish homeland would be created within a majority-Arab Palestinian state and that Jewish immigration to Palestine be limited to 75,000 for five years. 'Israel was not created because of the Balfour Declaration; it was created in spite of the Balfour Declaration,' said Michael B. Oren, an Israeli American historian who served as Israel's ambassador to Washington and later as a deputy minister in the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Oren argued that the decisions of Britain and France to recognise a state would not hasten an end to the conflict in Gaza but prolong it. By offering this concession to the Palestinians now, he said, the West had given Hamas even less incentive to agree to a ceasefire. He chalked it up to a bid for relevance by two postcolonial powers. 'These are former Middle Eastern powers that want to feel like Middle Eastern powers,' said Oren, who wrote Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East. 'There's a pathetic quality to it.' Others argue that if these moves had no impact, they would not have drawn the furious reactions they did from Netanyahu and other Israeli officials. The addition of Britain and France — plus Canada and Malta, which said last week that they, too, would back recognition at the United Nations General Assembly in September — means that more than three-quarters of the UN's 193 member states will have recognised a Palestinian state. France had a less direct stake in Palestine than Britain did after ceding its claims in the Sykes-Picot treaty. But its move towards Palestinian recognition represents another fateful turn in its relationship with Israel. From 1945 to 1967, France was Israel's biggest backer in the West. Part of that was rooted in its wrenching experience with decolonisation. In 1954, France faced an anti-colonial uprising in Algeria, where the nationalists were backed by Egypt's nationalist president, Gamal Abdel Nasser. France, viewing Israel as a bulwark against Nasser, drew close, supplying the country with Mirage fighter planes and nuclear technology that became the foundation of its undeclared nuclear weapons programme. But in 1967, days before Israel launched a military strike against Egypt, de Gaulle, then France's president, imposed an arms embargo on Israel and shifted his gaze to the Arab states. Gérard Araud, who served as France's ambassador to Israel from 2003 to 2006, said that rupture cast a long shadow. 'I felt there was always a sense of 'Don't trust the French,'' he recalled. By supporting Israel in the Arab-Israeli war of 1967, the United States had in any case supplanted France as its No. 1 ally. France went on to become the first Western country to develop close ties to the Palestine Liberation Organisation, which represents Palestinians internationally and is led by the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas. The decision to recognise a Palestinian state nevertheless carries significant political risk for Macron, Araud said. France has both the largest Jewish and the largest Muslim communities in Western Europe. It has been scarred by a string of Islamist terrorist attacks. In recognising Palestinian statehood, historians said, France and Britain would do well to recognise their diminished sway over a region they once ruled. Such recognition was sorely lacking for decades after the authors of Sykes-Picot divvied up the Middle East, with lasting consequences. 'Neither country understood that the age of colonialism was over,' Araud said. 'They behaved as if they were still all powerful. It's not the most glorious page of history for either country.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Mark Landler Photographs by: Saher Alghorra ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
First ‘Climate Citizens' Approved By Nauru In World-First Program
The Republic of Nauru has welcomed its first new citizens under the government's Economic and Climate Resilience Citizenship Program, announced at COP29 late last year. Nauru, ranked the world's fifth most vulnerable nation under the United Nations' Multidimensional Vulnerability Index (MVI) for its heightened exposure to economic and environmental shocks, launched the program as a way for conscientious investors to acquire an additional citizenship while contributing to climate adaptation and sustainable development projects in the South Pacific. Program CEO Edward Clark revealed the first approved applicant is a German family of four who recently sold their long-standing family business – a well-known, reputable German company - and are currently living in Dubai. 'They were looking for a second citizenship to provide them with a Plan B given the current global political volatility and chose the Nauru Economic & Climate Resilience Citizenship Program because the contribution was going towards tackling the impacts of climate change on the island,' he explained. Mr Clark, who has an extensive background in international banking, financial crime and compliance, said it took under four months from receiving the application to the granting of citizenship, and that strict due diligence processes were followed. 'This is a fundamental pillar of our program and a safeguard for Nauru's reputation and security,' he said. 'All applicants undergo checks with international law enforcement agencies and are subject to in-depth background verification. Our entire application process is consistent with international best practices. He said only individuals of the highest calibre who can participate in shaping Nauru's future will be granted citizenship. 'The granting of Nauruan citizenship to this family marks a major milestone for the program and provides even more confidence to those who are currently exploring Nauru citizenship by investment.' Nauru is embarking on a long-term project that will reform the nation in the face of economic challenges and climate change, which as well as dealing with issues like food and water security, includes the 'Higher Ground Initiative' - relocating almost the entire population from the coast to higher ground. The new citizens from Germany applied through international migration agents Henley & Partners, who in a statement said the company is, 'incredibly proud to represent the first applicant to be successfully granted citizenship under the Republic of Nauru's Economic and Climate Resilience Citizenship Program. 'For our firm, this goes beyond mobility; this is about directing capital into a Small Island Developing State, which is facing real climate risk. 'This is a clear example of how investment migration, when properly designed and governed, can channel capital toward economic and climate resilience measures and create a more sustainable future,' the statement concluded.
1News
2 days ago
- 1News
Thousands march across Sydney Harbour Bridge in Gaza protest
One of Australia's most well known landmarks has become the centrepoint of public resistance to Israel's military action in Gaza, with tens of thousands of protesters spilling onto the Sydney Harbour Bridge. On a wet and windy Sunday, hundreds of Palestinian flags could be seen fluttering in the breeze as protesters marched to spotlight suffering in Gaza. Rally organiser Palestine Action Group intended to draw attention to what the United Nations has described as "worsening famine conditions" in Gaza. Organisers expected tens of thousands to march from the Sydney CBD across the bridge to North Sydney, although numbers may have affected by heavy rain. Police yesterday sought an order to prohibit the protest but Supreme Court Justice Belinda Rigg rejected the application, meaning protesters will have immunity and protections from offences such as blocking or obstructing traffic or pedestrians. ADVERTISEMENT A large police presence was mobilised to ensure safety, with the bridge closed to motorists for most of today. "We ask that all the participants who are coming into the city to take part in this public assembly, listen to police, be respectful, understand that there will be large crowds," acting deputy commissioner Peter McKenna said. "We will have police right along the route and we'll be making sure this is done as safely and peacefully as possible." Police warned they would take swift action against anyone who sought to hijack the peaceful protest. Several Labor MPs defied state premier Chris Minns, joining the march alongside multiple Greens and independent colleagues. In support of the demonstration, the Jewish Council of Australia described the occasion as "momentous". ADVERTISEMENT "We stand with and join those marching across the bridge and call for immediate action to stop the Gaza genocide," executive officer Max Kaiser said in a statement. Executive Council of Australian Jewry CEO Alex Ryvchin said there was "a lot of dismay in the community and wider society that a single judge has overruled a decision of the police and the elected government made in the interests of public safety". Similar demonstrations were planned on Sunday in Melbourne and Adelaide. More than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to local health authorities, while the United Nations says dozens of people have died in recent weeks due to starvation. Israel's military campaign began after militant group Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1200 people and taking more than 251 hostages.
