
World's top court paves way for climate reparations
In a historic statement, the International Court of Justice said climate change was an 'urgent and existential threat' and countries had a legal duty to prevent harm from their planet-warming pollution.
Countries breaching their climate obligations were committing a 'wrongful act,' the court said in its advisory opinion, which is not legally binding but carries political and legal weight.
'The legal consequences resulting from the commission of an internationally wrongful act may include... full reparations to injured states in the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction,' said ICJ President Yuji Iwasawa on behalf of the 15-judge panel.
This would be on a case-by-case basis where a 'sufficient direct and certain causal nexus' had been shown 'between the wrongful act and the injury,' the court added.
Campaigners and countries on the climate frontlines hailed a milestone moment in the fight for accountability from big polluters most responsible for global warming.
'This is a victory for our planet, for climate justice and for the power of young people to make a difference,' said UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
Ralph Regenvanu, the climate change minister for Vanuatu, the Pacific island nation that spearheaded the case at The Hague, was jubilant.
Speaking to AFP outside the court, Regenvanu said it was 'a very strong opinion at the end' and better than hoped.
'We can use these arguments when we talk with our partners, some of the high-emitting states. We can say you have a legal obligation to help us,' he said.
'This helps us in our arguments. It's going to give us a lot more leverage... in all negotiations.'
This was the biggest case in ICJ history, and seen as the most consequential in a recent string of landmark climate moves.
The United Nations had tasked the 15 judges at the ICJ, a UN court in The Hague that adjudicates disputes between nations, to answer two fundamental questions.
First: what must states do under international law to protect the environment from greenhouse gas emissions for the future?
Second: what are the consequences for states whose emissions have caused environmental harm, especially to vulnerable low-lying island states?
In a detailed summary of the opinion, Iwasawa said the climate 'must be protected for present and future generations.'
The adverse effect of a warming planet 'may significantly impair the enjoyment of certain human rights, including the right to life,' he added.
Legal and climate experts said the opinion, while not legally binding, could have far-reaching consequences for national courts, legislation and public debate.
'The court's clear and detailed articulation of state obligations will be a catalyst for accelerated climate action and unprecedented accountability,' David Boyd, a former UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment, told AFP.
Johan Rockstrom, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, said the ruling bound all nations by international law to prevent harm from emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases.
The court was 'pointing the direction for the entire world and making clear that every nation is legally obliged to solve the climate crisis,' he told AFP.
'Perfect ending'
Courts have become a key battleground for climate action as frustration has grown over sluggish progress toward curbing planet-warming pollution from fossil fuels.
The Paris Agreement, struck through the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), has rallied a global response to the crisis, but not at the speed necessary to protect the world from dangerous overheating.
The journey to The Hague began six years ago with students from the climate-imperilled Pacific region fed up with the lack of accountability for the damage afflicting their homelands.
'Young Pacific Islanders initiated this call for humanity to the world. And the world must respond,' said UN chief Guterres, praising Vanuatu's leadership.
The fight pitted major wealthy economies against the smaller, less developed states which are most at the mercy of a warming planet.
More than 100 nations and groups made submissions, many from the Pacific who gave impassioned appeals in colorful traditional dress.
'It's such a perfect ending to a campaign that started in a classroom,' said Vishal Prasad, director of the student-led campaign that kicked off the case.
'We have now a very, very strong tool to hold power accountable, and we must do that now. The ICJ has given everything possible,' he told AFP.
The United States, which has embraced a fossil fuel agenda under President Donald Trump, had a muted response to the ruling.
A US State Department spokesperson said it 'will be reviewing the Court's advisory opinion in the coming days and weeks.'
French Ecological Transition Minister Agnes Pannier-Runacher hailed the advisory opinion as a 'victory for the most vulnerable states, a victory for France and a victory for the climate.'
John Kerry, the former US special envoy for climate change, said 'it should not take the stamp of international law to motivate countries to do what is already profoundly in their economic interests.'
'We shouldn't need another reason to act and accelerate action,' he told AFP.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Al Arabiya
4 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
UK's Starmer to recall cabinet from summer break to discuss Gaza: Report
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer will recall his cabinet from their summer break to discuss the situation in Gaza, the Financial Times reported on Sunday, amid growing pressure on the Labour government to recognize a Palestinian state. Starmer's office did not immediately reply to a Reuters request for comment on the report. The paper said the move to recall his cabinet of ministers next week was set out on Sunday by Downing Street. The UK parliament and cabinet are currently in a summer recess until September 1. The recall comes after Starmer said on Friday the British government would recognize a Palestinian state only as part of a negotiated peace deal, disappointing many in his Labour Party who want him to follow France in taking swifter action. President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday France would recognize a Palestinian state, a plan that drew strong condemnation from Israel and the United States, after similar moves from Spain, Norway and Ireland last year. More than 220 members of parliament in the UK, representing about a third of the House of Commons and mostly Labour members, wrote to Starmer on Friday urging him to recognize a Palestinian state. Successive British governments have said they will formally recognize a Palestinian state when the time is right, without ever setting a timetable or specifying the necessary conditions. Starmer's approach to the issue has been complicated by the arrival in Scotland on Friday of US President Donald Trump, with whom he has built warm relations. In foreign policy terms, Britain has rarely diverged from the United States. Israel has been facing growing international criticism, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government rejects, over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, where images of starving Palestinians have alarmed the world.


Arab News
4 hours ago
- Arab News
Europe can build its own social media
When I built my first website back in 1998, the internet felt expansive. You could publish something in Berlin and someone in Boston or Belgrade might stumble on it within seconds. But today, as a small number of tech monopolies hoover up attention and strangle innovation, that spirit of connection has been lost. Through their powerful platforms, social media giants control a large share of the digital world's underlying architecture. Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, X and others operate as walled gardens and their algorithms discourage users from leaving by deprioritizing posts with outgoing links. People end up stuck on one platform, scrolling mindlessly — an outcome diametrically opposed to the early vision of the internet as a web of interlinked sites and communities. Europe should recognize this for what it is: a systemic dependency that threatens the continent's digital sovereignty. Just as the EU seeks to reduce its reliance on external providers for semiconductors, cloud computing and artificial intelligence, it must do the same for social media. The dominant platforms extract value from European users by capturing their attention and selling their data, while paying little in taxes and skirting regulations. Their proprietary infrastructure increasingly shapes our lives, from the news we see to the way we speak online. While European policymakers have long expressed concern about the concentration of corporate power among the big social media companies, and their outsize influence on society and politics, last year's US presidential election should be sounding alarm bells across the continent. Tech billionaire Elon Musk weaponized X, the platform formerly known as Twitter that he acquired in 2022, to help Donald Trump win reelection by promoting content favorable to him. He has since threatened to interfere in European elections. One solution is to invest in EU-based alternatives. But time and again, policymakers trot out the same excuse that there are no viable options. The European Commission's new International Digital Strategy is likewise skeptical that the bloc can wean itself off Big Tech, instead calling for collaboration with the US to address its dependency. But this stance ignores the emergence in recent years of social media sites built on decentralized, open protocols. These new platforms are fundamentally different, in principle and design, from American behemoths such as Instagram and X. They restore control to users, reduce gatekeeping and encourage innovation. Open protocols are poised to upend the status quo, creating a more democratic digital world. Sebastian Vogelsang Perhaps the best example is the AT Protocol, which serves as the foundation for Bluesky, a fast-growing platform that has amassed almost 36 million users. Designed for interoperability, the AT Protocol allows users to own their data and control the algorithms that curate their feeds. Anyone can develop apps on the decentralized system — which means that no single company can dominate — and users can easily move between platforms, taking their followers and content with them. That means they never have to start over from scratch. This dedication to pluralism helps break Big Tech's monopoly power over social media, which has stifled European innovation for decades. Europe-based firms have already used the AT Protocol to create platforms such as SkyFeed and Graysky. Others are trying to protect and build out this social ecosystem free from Big Tech's grip. The Free Our Feeds campaign is working to ensure that the underlying infrastructure continues to be governed in the public interest. Eurosky is a new pro bono effort by a group of European technologists, including myself, to create tools, such as built-in content moderation aligned with EU laws, and infrastructure on the AT Protocol that help European developers build and scale platforms that can rival the social media giants. Open protocols are not some utopian project. They are poised to upend the status quo of social media, creating a more democratic digital world. That is why European policymakers should designate these social networking frameworks as critical infrastructure and invest in developing them. Social media should be at the heart of Europe's digital sovereignty agenda. Building platforms in Europe that rely on an open-source framework would help safeguard democratic discourse from foreign manipulation, create economic value for the continent and ensure European social media users control the algorithms that shape what they see. Countries outside the EU could also benefit from these efforts to challenge Big Tech's dominance. The online world has gone astray, with America's tech sector largely calling the shots on how it is developed and used. Europe can help return the internet to its roots by fostering a social media ecosystem built for pluralism, not polarization, but it needs political leaders who are willing to fight for a new, truly social digital infrastructure.

Al Arabiya
8 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
US says tariff deadline of August 1 is firm, no extensions
The US deadline of August 1 for imposing tariffs on its trading partners is firm and there will be no extensions, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Sunday. 'So no extensions, no more grace periods. August 1, the tariffs are set. They'll go into place. Customs will start collecting the money, and off we go,' Lutnick told 'Fox News Sunday.' For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app. After the levies kick in, President Donald Trump – who was negotiating Sunday in Scotland with European Union officials – is still willing to keep talking, Lutnick said. Of the Europeans, Lutnick said, 'You know they're hoping they make a deal, and it's up to President Trump, who's the leader of this negotiating table. We set the table.' So far five countries have struck deals with the Trump administration ahead of the Friday deadline as it tries to overhaul the global system of largely free trade by slapping tariffs on countries that the United States deems as engaging in unfair practices. These five are Britain, Vietnam, Indonesia the Philippines, and Japan. The levies they accepted are often higher than the new base rate of 10 percent that the United States has applied to most countries since April. But they are far below the levels the Trump administration threatened to impose if no deal were reached.