How the World Court is Shaping the Future of Climate Litigation: What You Need to Know

Key Points:

• ICJ’s opinion may shape future climate lawsuits.
• Wealthy nations favor existing treaties like the Paris Agreement.
• Developing countries demand stronger emissions regulations.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is set to release an advisory opinion that could greatly impact global climate action. While this opinion isn’t legally binding, its influence could be significant in future cases concerning climate matters.

Legal experts assert that this opinion is among the most pivotal in the ICJ’s history. It intends to clarify what international law requires to prevent severe climate damage that threatens humanity’s survival. Professor Payam Akhavan, who represented vulnerable island states at these hearings, emphasized the urgency of addressing the threats posed by rising sea levels.

During discussions, over a hundred nations contributed insights into two crucial questions: what responsibilities countries hold under international law to safeguard the climate, and what legal repercussions exist for countries that harm the climate system. Wealthy nations focused on existing agreements like the 2015 Paris Agreement, which many view as too weak. In contrast, developing countries and small island states called for robust measures to cut emissions.

The Paris Agreement saw more than 190 nations pledging to limit temperature increases. Yet, greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. The UN’s recent “Emissions Gap Report” warned that unless significant changes occur, global temperatures could exceed 3°C by 2100, with severe repercussions.

There’s a notable trend: climate-related lawsuits are on the rise, with nearly 3,000 cases filed in 60 countries, according to the Grantham Research Institute. While outcomes have varied, they reflect growing accountability for climate inaction. For instance, a recent international ruling emphasized the need for collaboration among Latin American nations to combat climate change.

Finally, climate activists view the upcoming opinion as a potential game-changer. Even if the ruling is advisory, it could recognize that inaction by major polluters constitutes a violation of international law. As attorney Joie Chowdhury pointed out, this opinion could guide national and regional courts in their own decisions, making it hard for countries to ignore its implications.

The ICJ is set to announce its opinion at 3 PM (1300 GMT). The impact of this ruling could resonate widely, influencing decisions on climate justice for years to come.