UN’s Top Court Affirms Existential Threat Posed by Climate Change
Advisory opinion paves the way for states to be held legally responsible for climate harms
WASHINGTON — In a 140-page advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice, the United Nations’ highest court, today unanimously affirmed “the urgent and existential threat posed by climate change” and states’ obligations to mitigate it.
The advisory opinion is not binding but is likely to have major implications for the interpretation and application of international law. It underlines the obligations of state parties to protect the climate and other environmental systems from the harms of greenhouse gases and to act with due diligence to control harm occurring in or committed by entities in their jurisdictions.
The unanimous advisory opinion asserts that states have obligations to prevent harms to the climate by addressing damaging activities in their jurisdiction. The opinion provides a list of remedies that could be levied against violating states, including requiring the state to reconstruct damaged or destroyed infrastructure, restore ecosystems and biodiversity, and provide financial compensation.
In response, Stephanie Brancaforte, a senior advisor with Public Citizen’s Climate Program, issued the following statement:
“The court could not have been clearer in outlining states’ obligations to address the climate crisis and the threat to human life and livelihood from the continued emission of greenhouse gases occurring within their borders or caused by their companies. This opinion helps clear the path for injured parties to seek a host of remedies, ranging from financial compensation to reparations and restitution—including cessation of climate-polluting emissions.
“This decision creates a real pathway towards accountability by focusing on redressing harms caused by States within their jurisdictions. In so doing, the court today reinforced the principle that while numerous states may have been responsible for causing damages, that does not exempt any one state or actor from reparations. Under this decision, member states could be subject to meaningful liability for acts such as authorizing subsidies to climate-polluting industries, granting permission to extract and emit greenhouse gases, and potentially for allowing the financing of these harmful activities.
“The International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion, prompted by Pacific Island law students whose lives and livelihoods are particularly at risk, enunciates what people around the world know to be just and fair: states have an obligation to adapt to and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. They have an obligation to cooperate to stop climate change, including by providing financial and technological support. More succinctly – governments can and should be held responsible for the damages they cause.”
# # #