World Court to issue climate change opinion on July 23
The so-called advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, is also expected to address whether large states contributing the most to greenhouse-gas emissions should be liable for damage caused to small island nations.
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a similar opinion last week finding that its 20 Latin American and Caribbean member states must cooperate to tackle climate change and not take actions that set back environmental protections.
During two weeks of hearings before the World Court in December, wealthy countries of the global north broadly argued that existing climate treaties like the Paris Agreement, which are largely nonbinding, should be the basis for deciding countries' responsibilities.
Developing nations and small island states bearing the brunt of climate change argued for robust measures to curb emissions and require financial support from wealthy polluting nations.
The World Court's advisory opinion is part of a global wave of climate litigation as countries, organizations and individuals are increasingly turning to courts for climate action.
While nonbinding, the court's interpretations of law carry a lot of legal and political weight. Experts say its opinion could set a precedent in climate change-driven lawsuits in courts from Europe to Latin America and beyond.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Starmer's migrants return deal a ‘publicity stunt' that won't win back voters, top pollsters warn
Sir Keir Starmer 's much-lauded 'one in, one out' migrant return deal with Emmanuel Macron is a 'publicity stunt' that won't win back voters, Britain's leading pollsters have warned. Professor Sir John Curtice, Lord Robert Hayward and Luke Tryl have suggested that the small scale of the agreement, which will only see a tiny fraction of those arriving on small boats returned to France, will have little or no impact on the prime minister's dwindling popularity because of record low trust in the government. The problem was underlined on Thursday when more than 700 migrants arrived on small boats just hours before the announcement of the deal, which will reportedly see only 50 returned a week, although ministers have refused to discuss specific numbers. It comes as new polling reveals concerns about the government's wider migration policy, with polling of Labour party members, seen by The Independent, showing opposition to Sir Keir's plans to crack down on legal migration as well. According to a Survation poll of 1,304 Labour Party members for LabourList, 53 per cent oppose plans to only allow migrants the right to apply for citizenship after 10 years of being in the UK on a work visa, up from five years. Only 36 per cent supported it. The measure is a key part of bringing down legal migration, along with banning the overseas recruitment of care workers. But it highlights splits within the Labour Party over both the plans for legal and illegal migration, with some on the left unhappy with the deal, which will see the UK accept the same number of asylum seekers with family or strong ties to the UK back. The focus on tackling both legal and illegal migration has been part of a strategy to tackle the loss of votes to Nigel Farage's Reform UK. The most recent Techne UK poll for The Independent put Reform up one point to 29 per cent, seven points ahead of Labour, who were down one on 22 per cent. Reflecting on whether the migrants return policy will impress voters, Prof Curtice said: 'I would be surprised if it were to have a 'significant' impact.' Lord Hayward, a Tory peer and highly respected pollster, said the announcement was 'a publicity stunt', adding: 'The deal will have no impact really. There are so many questions about the plan.' He also noted that the real problem for Sir Keir and his government is a record low level of confidence in the government. 'I think the figure for net confidence level may be at or on a par with the worst ever,' he added. Only 23 per cent expressed confidence in Sir Keir's government, according to the Techne UK poll, compared to 63 per cent not confident, giving an overall rating of -40. Meanwhile, Luke Tryl, director of the More in Common think tank, said the glimmer of hope for the government would be images of migrants who had come to the UK on small boats being returned to France. On Friday, more than 350 migrants cross the English Channel, according to the Home Office. Mr Tryl said: 'I suspect this deal, in of itself, wouldn't make much of an impact. But if it is seen like 'this is happening', and I think particularly once people see people actually being removed, I think that is going to be something that has the potential to be quite powerful.' However, he said that the small boats crisis and the rising number of people coming across the English Channel illegally - currently at over 21,000 and 53 per cent higher than this time last year - was seen 'as evidence that the government has lost control'. Mr Tryl added: 'We have around seven in 10 people saying the government isn't in control, and as I say, Channel crossings are one of the most visible signs of that.' He noted: 'It's interesting, they've avoided the 'stop the boats' language used by Rishi Sunak. I think they've been quite sober about this, which I think is good, given where public expectations are. 'But there is no doubt that Channel crossings are a major motivator of support for Reform. They define the immigration debate. If you ask people the priority between tackling small boats and levels of migration overall, 74 per cent say the priority is small boats.' There is some disquiet on the left of the Labour Party that plans to open 'safe and legal routes' for asylum seekers are no longer part of the discussion as Sir Keir 'obsesses' about the rise of Nigel Farage's Reform. One senior figure on the left of the party said: 'We need to zoom out a bit more to have that perspective. I don't at all think it will be enough to satiate Reform and those demanding a very hard line approach. 'The conversation needs to be broadened out to proper discussion on safe legal pathways and migrants working whilst claims are processed.' Another leftwing MP described the left of the party as 'wounded' with recent announcements and suggested that the question is 'whether MPs have the stomach for a coup' against the prime minister. But one cheerleader for the announcement with France is Labour's MP for Dover and Deal, Mike Tapp, whose constituency sees most of those arriving via small boats, has been calling for much tougher action. He said: 'Massive strides have been made in tackling the small boat crisis. What will Reform do? They'll continue to fall apart. This, combined with record deportations and removals and taking down criminal gangs with counter terror powers - will make a difference.' The government has been contacted for a response.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Reeves to stop green groups from blocking defence investment
The Chancellor will announce plans to stop environmental activists blocking investment in defence in a major speech next week. Banks and pension funds currently follow environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards drawn up by private firms, which are meant to measure their impact on wider society. But pension giants and banks have been criticised for allowing these rules to restrict how much they invest in defence companies, on the basis that the firms do not promote social good. Rachel Reeves plans to bring ESG ratings under the powers of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), to ensure there is only one set of rules in future. The Treasury is expected to lay out secondary legislation later this year to facilitate the change. The new rules will benefit defence companies by making it clear that investors must take into account their positive role in keeping Britain secure. A Treasury source told The Sunday Telegraph: 'Rachel has always been clear that supporting the defence industry is consistent with ethical investing. 'If opaque ESG ratings are getting in the way of private investment, that has to change.' Officials are said to be looking to raise the profile of the Defence Investors' Advisory Group, and believe this would be a good opportunity to do so, a City source said. The group, which will be comprised of venture capital and private equity firms, will support defence start-ups and advise on how best to generate investment. In addition, the Ministry of Defence is expected to devise a financial services strategy by March 2026. A government consultation last year concluded that requirements for transparency around ESG ratings would support 'greater investor awareness of the defence industry's role'. 'Ill-considered anti-defence rules' It comes after Sir Keir Starmer vowed to spend at least 5 per cent of the UK's GDP on national security by 2035, including core defence spending rising to at least 2.5 per cent by April 2027, and 3 per cent by 2034. In March, more than 100 MPs and peers signed an open letter to the UK's finance industry urging it to 'sweep away ill-considered anti-defence rules' that limit investments in the arms industry. The letter said: 'We must rethink ESG mechanisms that often wrongly exclude all defence investment as 'unethical'.' Signatories include high ranking military figures including Baron Robertson of Port Ellen, the former general secretary of Nato, and Baron West of Spithead, a former Admiral in the Royal Navy. Aviva, Royal London and the National Employment Savings Trust (Nest) were among pension giants to restrict defence investment on ethical grounds. Later that month, António Simões, the chief executive of major pension firm Legal & General, said that defence companies should be considered ethical investments because countries need to be able to defend themselves. He said: 'There's no reason in principle why investing in defence companies cannot be consistent with responsible investing. 'Governments should promote peaceful and inclusive societies but countries also may need to defend themselves. This is a UN-type of principle. We've always said that defence companies, including UK defence companies, can be invested in.' Around £17 billion is invested in ESG funds in Britain. These ethical funds boomed in popularity after Covid with nearly 3,000 launched between 2020 and 2023 globally, attracting $600 billion of investment. Concerns have been raised that funds with ESG labels do not return as much for investors. Investors in actively managed 'green' funds would have seen their money underperform the average UK equity market by 3.8 per cent a year between the end of 2019 and the beginning of 2025, analysis by SCM Direct found in February.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
EU says it still wants US trade deal, will defend interests
July 12 (Reuters) - The EU is ready to retaliate to safeguard its interests if the U.S. proceeds with imposing a threatened 30% tariff on European goods starting on August 1, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Saturday. However, von der Leyen, head of the EU executive which handles trade policy for the 27 member countries of the EU, said it was also ready to keep working towards an agreement by August 1. "Few economies in the world match the European Union's level of openness and adherence to fair trading practices," she said in response to new threats by U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday escalating a trade war Europe had hoped to avoid. "We will take all necessary steps to safeguard EU interests, including the adoption of proportionate countermeasures if required," she said of possible retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods entering Europe. European capitals swiftly backed that position. "As part of European unity, it is more than ever up to the Commission to assert the Union's determination to defend European interests resolutely," French President Emmanuel Macron said on X. German Economy Minister Katherina Reiche urged a statement for a "pragmatic outcome to the negotiations". "The tariffs would hit European exporting companies hard. At the same time, they would also have a strong impact on the economy and consumers on the other side of the Atlantic," she said. Spain's Economy Ministry backed further negotiations but added that Spain and others in the EU were ready to take "proportionate countermeasures if necessary". Trump has periodically railed against the European Union, saying in February it was "formed to screw the United States" and asking why Europe exports so many cars but buys so few U.S. cars in return. His biggest grievance is the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with the EU, which in 2024 amounted to $235 billion, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. The EU has repeatedly pointed to the U.S. surplus in services, arguing it in part redresses the balance. Combining goods, services and investment, the EU and the United States are each other's largest trading partners by far. The American Chamber of Commerce to the EU said in March the trade dispute could jeopardise $9.5 trillion of business in the world's most important commercial relationship. "Europe must not allow itself to be intimidated by this, but must soberly seek a solution at the negotiating table on equal terms," said Dirk Jandura, president of the German exporters association BGA, adding the latest threats were a "well-rehearsed" part of his negotiating strategy. Carsten Brzeski, global head of macro at ING, said Trump's move suggested that months of negotiations remained deadlocked and that things were inching towards a make-or-break moment for the transatlantic trade relationship. "The EU will now have to decide whether to budge or to play hardball," he said. "Its hard to draw real conclusions right now other than this will bring market volatility and even more uncertainty." Cyrus de la Rubia, chief economist at Hamburg Commercial Bank, noted that the brunt of the U.S. tariffs, if implemented, would be felt by U.S. consumers. "The EU should take a hard line in negotiations, because model calculations show that tariffs against the EU have a stronger negative effect in the US than in the eurozone." That said, there would also be clear repercussions for the euro area economy, already struggling with weak growth. The European Central Bank had used a 10% tariff on EU exports to the United States as the baseline in its latest economic projections, which put output growth in the euro area at 0.9% this year and 1.1% the next and 1.3% in 2027. It said a 20% U.S. tariff would curb growth by 1 percentage point over the same period and also pull down inflation to 1.8% in 2027, from 2.0% in the baseline scenario. It did not even offer an estimate for the possibility of a 30% tariff.
