Physical Address
23,24,25 & 26, 2nd Floor, Software Technology Park India, Opp: Garware Stadium,MIDC, Chikalthana, Aurangabad, Maharashtra – 431001 India
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has concluded hearings for its most significant climate change case to date, where 96 countries and 11 international organizations presented their arguments from December 2 to 13. The case focused on the obligations of major greenhouse gas-emitting nations to address climate change and the legal mechanisms to hold them accountable for its devastating impacts.
The plaintiffs criticized existing frameworks, such as the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, as inadequate. They urged the ICJ to incorporate broader international environmental and human rights laws into its advisory opinion, expected in early 2025, to reflect the scale of the climate emergency.
Arnold Kiel Loughman, attorney general for Vanuatu, emphasized the collective resolve of nations across Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean, and Pacific island states to use international law to address the crisis. Youth-led organizations, such as Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change and the World’s Youth for Climate Justice, joined by groups like the IUCN, underscored the need to protect current and future generations from worsening climate impacts.
At the forefront of this historic effort are Vanuatu and other vulnerable Pacific island nations, whose very survival is threatened by rising sea levels and intensifying storms. Despite contributing minimally to global emissions, these nations face disproportionately severe consequences. Their leaders are demanding a clear and unequivocal declaration that the environmental devastation caused by unchecked carbon emissions constitutes a violation of international law. Nations from the Global South stressed that climate change threatens their very survival. They highlighted the stark inequity: a small group of industrialized nations, primarily responsible for the crisis, continues to exploit fossil fuels while countries like Zambia argued that climate change affects every aspect of their economies.
Meanwhile, major emitters—including the U.S., U.K., Germany, Saudi Arabia, and China—contended that the ICJ was not the appropriate venue to clarify climate obligations. They argued that existing treaties were sufficient and that additional legal accountability could discourage participation in global climate processes.
This legal battle follows mounting frustration with global climate negotiations, such as COP29, which resulted in a $300 billion annual commitment to assist developing nations in coping with climate change.
Vanuatu, contributing just 0.02% to global emissions, epitomizes the stark injustice of climate change. As one of the most vulnerable nations, it endures relentless superstorms, floods, and rising seas that wreak untold havoc on its people and economy.
While the ICJ’s opinion will be advisory, it could establish a powerful moral and legal precedent, compelling greater accountability for climate harms and inspiring stronger global action to protect vulnerable nations and communities.
References:
Justice for the Planet: ICJ Takes on Landmark Case to Address Global Climate Crisis
Landmark ICJ climate change hearing concludes; opinion expected in 2025
Banner Image: Representative Image
