In July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) made a significant ruling. They stated that all countries must take action against climate change, calling it an “urgent and existential threat” to humanity. This decision marks a crucial step in recognizing the legal responsibilities of nations to protect our planet.
The ruling builds on previous climate lawsuits and adds strength to earlier judgments from other courts focused on human rights. By taking the climate crisis to the highest court, this ruling has raised the bar for climate justice.
The ICJ clarified that countries cannot escape responsibility based on treaty agreements like the Paris agreement. Even nations that have withdrawn from such agreements are still legally obligated to prevent harm to the environment. This sets a new precedent: every person has a right to a clean, healthy environment.
As the world turns its eyes to the upcoming COP30 climate conference, experts and activists are paying close attention. A group of UN experts plans to emphasize the importance of complying with the ICJ ruling. They will advocate for banning fossil fuel lobbyists and ensuring transparency in climate negotiations.
Jacob Werksman, who represents the EU in climate talks, warned that the ICJ decision could complicate negotiations. However, many believe it provides a strong foundation for pushing back against nations that would downplay their obligations.
Countries like Vanuatu, heavily affected by climate change, are mobilizing to keep this ruling in the spotlight, demanding that polluting nations fulfill their legal obligations. They argue that climate cooperation is not just a matter of goodwill but a legal requirement.
What’s alarming is the ongoing expansion and profits from fossil fuels, even as global emissions continue to rise. The ICJ ruling highlighted that states have a duty to reduce fossil fuel extraction and consumption significantly. Efforts to delay climate action by major oil and gas players will likely impact future climate policies.
There’s also a pressing need for support for nations already facing climate damage. The ICJ ruling signals that wealthier nations must help address climate-related losses for poorer countries. Activists believe this could be a turning point in the fight for climate justice, allowing for reparations for environmental harm.
While the ICJ ruling laid out responsibilities, there are gaps regarding enforcement and accountability. Countries may face challenges in proving legal breaches related to international obligations. Yet, this ruling is fostering a shift in climate law globally, motivating activists and communities to hold governments accountable.
Adam Weiss from ClientEarth points out that the legal landscape is changing, signaling a crucial moment in environmental law. This new direction may ultimately reshape how governments approach climate action moving forward.
Source link
