World Court Says Countries Are Legally Obligated To Curb Emissions, Protect Climate
This includes the obligation under the Paris Agreement on climate change to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
The Court further ruled that if States breach these obligations, they incur legal responsibility and may be required to cease the wrongful conduct, offer guarantees of non-repetition and make full reparation depending on the circumstances.
'A victory for our planet'
UN Secretary-General António Guterres issued a video message welcoming the historic decision, which came a day after he delivered a special address to Member States on the unstoppable global shift to renewable energy.
"This is a victory for our planet, for climate justice and for the power of young people to make a difference," he said.
Reasoning of the Court
The Court used Member States' commitments to both environmental and human rights treaties to justify this decision.
Firstly, Member States are parties to a variety of environmental treaties, including ozone layer treaties, the Biodiversity Convention, the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement and many more, which oblige them to protect the environment for people worldwide and in future generations.
But, also because 'a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is a precondition for the enjoyment of many human rights,' since Member States are parties to numerous human rights treaties, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they are required to guarantee the enjoyment of such rights by addressing climate change.
Case background
In September 2021, the Pacific Island State of Vanuatu announced that it would seek an advisory opinion from the Court on climate change. This initiative was inspired by the youth group Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, which underscored the need to act to address climate change, particularly in small island States.
After the country lobbied other UN Member States to support this initiative in the General Assembly, on 29 March 2023, it adopted a resolution requesting an advisory opinion from the ICJ on two questions: (1) What are the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the environment? and (2) What are the legal consequences for States under these obligations when they cause harm to the environment?
The UN Charter allows the General Assembly or the Security Council to request the ICJ to provide an advisory opinion. Even though advisory opinions are not binding, they carry significant legal and moral authority and help clarify and develop international law by defining States' legal obligations.
This is the largest case ever seen by the ICJ, evident by the number of written statements (91) and States that participated in oral proceedings (97).
The 'World Court'
The ICJ, informally known as the 'World Court', settles legal disputes between UN Member States and gives advisory opinions on legal questions that have been referred to it by UN organs and agencies.
It is one of the six main organs of the UN alongside the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the Trusteeship Council and the Secretariat and is the only one not based in New York.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
13 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Hostage videos show emaciated Israelis, Hamas blames Israel for starvation
David's sister, Ye'ela, said watching the clip of her emaciated brother felt like 'one million punches to the heart'. She pleaded with the public not to share the images, as her mother and other brother had not yet seen the footage. Earlier on Thursday, the Islamic Jihad terrorist group released a video of hostage Rom Braslavski, 21, also looking emaciated. The terror group claimed the six-minute video was recorded days before it lost contact with the captors holding Braslavski, saying it did not know what had happened to him. His mother, Tami, said the terrorists had 'broken' her son. 'They broke my boy. I want him home now. I know how many beatings he is taking. Look at him. Thin, limp, crying. All his bones are out. Don't cry over the children in Gaza. Cry for Rom. Have compassion for the hostages,' she told Israeli media Ynet. With two hostage videos released in 24 hours, both of which blame Israel for starving the people of Gaza, Hamas seeks to increase international pressure on the Israeli Government. Aid agencies, including the UN, are warning that hunger and malnutrition may have reached a tipping point, raising fears of mass starvation. Israel has denied accusations of starving Palestinians, instead pointing the finger at the UN for failing to collect and distribute the food that enters through border crossings. US President Donald Trump said this week that starvation was happening in Gaza, despite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's denials. 'You can't fake that,' he said on Tuesday, adding that he was 'not particularly' convinced by his ally. Steve Witkoff, Trump's Middle East envoy, spent five hours visiting controversial aid distribution sites in the war-battered enclave on Friday. Witkoff, the first senior official to visit Gaza since the war began, said that what he learnt would help Washington 'craft a plan' to get more food and aid to Palestinians. On Friday, 126 aid packages, containing food for the residents of the southern and northern Gaza Strip, were airdropped by France, Spain, the UAE, Jordan, Egypt and Germany, the Israel Defence Forces said. Witkoff and Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador for Israel, toured one of the four sites run by the controversial Israeli and US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). Aid agencies have accused the foundation of contributing to the hunger crisis. More than 1300 people seeking aid in Gaza have been killed since GHF took over aid operations in late May, according to the UN, most of them shot by Israeli forces 'in the vicinity' of the aid hubs. GHF has denied the claims. Israel claims Hamas is looting aid for its own fighters, thus enabling accusations the Jewish state is deliberately starving Palestinians. Hamas denies this. Eli Sharabi, an Israeli former hostage, testified before the UN Security Council in March that 'Hamas eats like kings, while hostages starve'. Sharabi said: 'I saw Hamas terrorists carrying boxes with the UN and UNRWA emblems on them into the tunnels, dozens and dozens of boxes, paid for by your Government. They would eat many meals a day from the UN aid in front of us, and we never received any of it.'
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Pacific Waves for 2 August 2025
NZ in Cook Islands domestic affairs 'improper' - Henry Puna; Paris agreement 'not enough' for Kanaks - Roch Wamytan; Pacific shoppers in NZ unhappy with locked up corned beef. Tags: To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
The Spinoff
2 days ago
- The Spinoff
Calls grow for NZ to take a stand on Palestinian statehood
Canada, the UK and France are on the brink of recognising Palestine – so why is New Zealand still holding back, asks Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Pressure mounts as allies take a stand New Zealand is coming under increasing pressure to recognise Palestine as a state, as key allies signal they're preparing to do just that. On Wednesday, foreign minister Winston Peters joined 14 other counterparts in signing a statement declaring their 'willingness or positive consideration' of Palestinian recognition. But Peters, backed by prime minister Christopher Luxon, made clear that formal recognition won't happen any time soon, reports RNZ's Craig McCulloch. In parliament this week, Peters argued that 'if we are to recognise the state of Palestine, New Zealand wants to know that what we are recognising is a legitimate, representative, viable political entity'. His caution hasn't stemmed the growing chorus of criticism. Former prime minister Helen Clark said that on the statehood issue, New Zealand has been hamstrung by its desire not to upset the US. 'That is no longer tenable,' she told Morning Report. Greens co-leader Marama Davidson was more blunt: 'History will judge Aotearoa if we fail to do what is right at this pivotal moment. It's time for the government to make a clear stand for human rights and for justice, and recognise Palestine as a state.' A shifting international tide New Zealand's hesitation comes as other liberal democracies move towards recognition. Canada on Thursday became the third country in a week to announce it will recognise Palestine, following similar pledges from France and the UK. Britain's promise is conditional on Israel allowing more aid into Gaza, ending its annexation plans and committing to a two-state peace process. As the UK foreign secretary David Lammy pointed out in a speech to the UN this week, Britain carries a particular responsibility to Palestine due to its colonial-era role in shaping the modern Middle East, beginning with the 1917 Balfour Declaration. Support for a two-state solution, he said, should be viewed as part of that legacy. Currently, 147 of the UN's 193 member states recognise Palestine; that number is poised to grow in the coming months. In Australia, prime minister Anthony Albanese is 'preparing the ground' for recognition, reported the ABC, but has indicated he wants to choose a moment that will have the most impact on peace prospects. The case for economic pressure In a powerful article for The Spinoff this week, New Zealand journalist Cole Martin – currently based in a refugee camp in the occupied West Bank – accused the government of offering only 'empty rhetoric' in the face of Israel's ongoing assault on Gaza. While New Zealand has signed joint statements and imposed targeted travel bans on a handful of Israeli officials, Martin says it has taken no significant action in 21 months to deter what he describes as 'genocidal' violence and apartheid policies. Martin argues that 'meaningful disruption is essential', and that economic pressure – including divestment, sanctions and boycotts – is among the most effective non-violent tools available. 'Global economic sanctions played a pivotal role in ending apartheid in South Africa,' he wrote. 'The same tools must now be applied to Israel.' What else can New Zealand do? While sanctions and trade restrictions are the most obvious tools available, they're not the only ones. Auckland University law professor Treasa Dunworth, writing for The Conversation, outlines several other ways New Zealand could demonstrate its opposition to Israel's conduct and support for Palestinian rights. These include creating a special visa pathway for Palestinians seeking family reunification, launching an inquiry into New Zealand's intelligence-sharing with Israel via the Five Eyes network, and withdrawing from Operation Prosperity Guardian, the US-led naval coalition in the Red Sea. Dunworth also points out that New Zealand could act unilaterally to refer Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the International Criminal Court for the use of starvation as a weapon of war. Each of these steps, she argues, is legally and diplomatically feasible – but all require political will. The question now, as more peer nations act, is whether New Zealand's government is willing to move beyond words.
