Tuesday, December 03, 2024

Frontline Nations Demand Climate Accountability at the ICJ

Countries like Vanuatu hope that a forthcoming opinion will accelerate action around the climate emergency.
December 2, 2024
Human rights lawyer and Vanuatu's lead counsel Julian Aguon leaves after small Pacific island states attend hearings inside the International Court of Justice on December 2, 2024, in The Hague, Netherlands.
Michel Porro / Getty Images

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) heard arguments Monday in the largest climate case ever brought before it as a coalition of low-lying and developing nations demanded larger polluting nations be held to account under international law for causing “significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment” with runaway fossil fuel emissions over recent decades.

In the first day of hearings in The Hague that could last weeks, multiple representatives from the Pacific island of Vanuatu, which is leading the coalition of over 100 countries and allied organizations, laid the blame for the climate crisis at the feet of a small number of states that are large emitters of greenhouse gases.

“We know what the cause of climate change is: a conduct of specific States … Vanuatu’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions is negligible, and yet we are among those most affected by climate change,” said Arnold Kiel Loughman, attorney general of the Republic of Vanuatu.

“We find ourselves on the frontlines of a crisis we did not create,” Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu’s special envoy for climate change and environment, told the court.

Monday’s historic moment at The Hague follows years of work on the part of Pacific Island nations, particularly Vanuatu, to push for the ICJ to take up the issue of global warming and human rights. The stakes of the planetary emergency are particularly high for these countries, which are under threat from rising seas and other climate impacts.


As Summit Ends in Cop-Out, Can Social Tipping Points Change Climate Trajectory?
COP29 fizzled out as catastrophe looms. Could a mass change in political consciousness still stave off the worst? By Gareth Dale , Truthout November 22, 2024


Ilan Kiloe, legal counsel for the Melanesian Spearhead Group, a regional subgroup that includes Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu, issued a stark warning during his remarks to the court: “Climate change is now depriving our peoples, again, of our ability to enjoy our right to self-determination in our lands. The harsh reality is that many of our people will not survive.”

Last year, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution calling on the ICJ to issue an advisory opinion on climate change and human rights. The measure, which was introduced by Vanuatu and co-sponsored by more than 130 governments, requested that the world’s highest court outline countries’ legal responsibilities for combatting fossil fuel-driven climate change and the legal consequences of failing to meet those obligations.

Over the next two weeks, the court will hear statements from nearly 100 nations, including wealthy developed countries such as the United States. Advisory opinions, unlike judgments, are not binding—but Vanuatu and other supporters hope that a forthcoming opinion would accelerate action around the climate emergency.

The country began pushing for the ICJ resolution in 2021, following a campaign launched in 2019 by a group of students from the University of the South Pacific.

“What started in the Pacific is now a historic climate justice campaign, as the world’s most urgent problem of climate change reaches the world’s highest court,” said Shiva Gounden of Greenpeace Australia Pacific.

“The next two weeks of hearings are the culmination of collective campaigning from 2019, powerful advocacy, and mobilizing the world behind this landmark campaign, to ensure the human rights of current and future generations are protected from climate destruction, and the biggest emitters are held accountable.”

Polly Banks, Vanuatu country director for Save the Children, who travelled to The Hague for the proceedings, said that “the hearing before the Court goes to questions about the efficacy, equity and fairness of the current responses to climate change, which are particularly relevant for children, who have contributed the least to climate change but will be most affected by its consequences.”

“Currently, only 2.4% of climate finance from multilateral funding sources is child-responsive. Even without the Court’s opinion, we know that states need to do far more to protect children from the worst impacts of this crisis, by significantly increasing climate finance to uphold children’s basic rights and access to health, education and protection,” Banks added.

The start of hearings at The Hague come on the heels of a COP29 climate summit that was heavily criticized. The summit focused heavily on climate finance, but the resulting deal was panned by critics as rich nations agreed to voluntarily provide just $300 billion to help developing nations decarbonize and deal with the impacts of the climate emergency. Poor nations and climate campaigners had demanded over a trillion dollars in funding in the form of debt-free grants and direct payments.

‘Future of planet’ at stake at ICJ hearings: Vanuatu


By AFP
December 2, 2024

A handful of protesters gathered outside the Peace Palace
 - Copyright AFP Bertrand GUAY

Richard CARTER

The future of the planet is at stake during hearings at the top United Nations court, a representative for Vanuatu said Monday, opening a historic case that aims to set a legal framework on how countries should tackle climate change.

More than 100 countries and organisations are set to present before the International Court of Justice over the next two weeks, the highest number ever.

“The outcome of these proceedings will reverberate across generations, determining the fate of nations like mine and the future of our planet,” said Vanuatu’s representative for climate change, Ralph Regenvanu.

“This may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity,” Regenvanu told the 15-judge bench in the panelled hall of the Peace Palace in The Hague.

Activists hope the ICJ opinion will have far-reaching legal consequences in the fight against climate change, impacting ongoing court cases as well as domestic and international legislation.


Others fear the UN-backed request for a non-binding advisory opinion will have limited impact — and it could take the UN’s highest court months, or even years, to deliver.

A handful of protesters gathered outside the Peace Palace, near a big screen reading “We are watching”.

Demonstrators had hung banners saying: “Biggest problem to the highest court” and “Fund our future, climate finance now.”

“This hearing means everything for the climate justice movement,” Siosiua Veikune, 25, from Tonga, who is part of the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change group, told AFP.

The presentations at the scenic Peace Palace come days after a bitterly negotiated climate deal at the COP29 summit in Azerbaijan.

Wealthy polluting countries ultimately agreed to find at least $300 billion a year by 2035 to help poorer nations transition to cleaner energy sources and prepare for increasing climate impacts such as extreme weather.

Developing countries condemned the pledge as too little, too late, and the summit’s final deal failed to include a global pledge to move away from burning planet-heating fossil fuels.

– ‘Pivotal moment’ –


The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution last year that referred two key climate questions to the ICJ.

First, it asked, what obligations do states have under international law to protect the Earth’s climate system from polluting greenhouse gas emissions?

Second, what are the legal consequences of these obligations in cases where states, “by their acts and omissions, have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment”?

The second question also was linked to the legal responsibilities states have for harm caused by climate change to small, more vulnerable countries and their populations.

This applies especially to countries under threat from rising sea levels and harsh weather patterns in places like the Pacific Ocean.

– Record-high emissions –


Joie Chowdhury, a senior lawyer at the US- and Swiss-based Center for International Environmental Law, said climate advocates did not expect the ICJ’s opinion “to provide very specific answers”.

Instead, she predicted the court would provide “a legal blueprint… on which more specific questions can be decided”.

The judges’ opinion, which she expects some time next year, “will inform climate litigation on domestic, national and international levels”.

Some of the world’s largest carbon polluters — including the top three greenhouse gas emitters, China, the United States and India — will be among the 98 countries and 12 organisations to address the court.

The world agreed in Paris in 2015 to try to limit global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels.

But it did not prescribe how to achieve that and it is nowhere near on track.

Preliminary scientific data from the Global Carbon Project, published during the COP29 negotiations, showed that emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas rose this year to a new record high.

“When the Paris agreement was concluded, the youth of the world looked up to it as an instrument of hope,” Cynthia Houniuhi, president of the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, told the court.

“Today, the entire process has been hijacked by large emitters and major fossil fuel producers, turning it into a political safe harbour and a trap for everyone else,” she said.

“For the world’s youth and future generations, the consequences are existential.”



Landmark climate case to open at top UN court

By AFP
December 1, 2024

Houses destroyed by rising sea levels in Abidjan, Ivory Coast 
- Copyright AFP Issouf SANOGO

Jan HENNOP

The United Nations’ top court will start unprecedented hearings on Monday aimed at setting legal guidelines for how countries should protect the planet against climate change and help vulnerable nations combat its devastating impact.

Representatives from Vanuatu and other low-lying at-risk islands in the Pacific Ocean will open marathon proceedings at the International Court of Justice at 10:00 am (0900 GMT) before a 15-judge panel.

Over the course of the next two weeks, more than 100 countries and organisations will make submissions on the topic, the highest number ever before the Hague-based court.

Activists hope that the opinion from the ICJ’s judges will have far-reaching legal consequences in the fight against climate change.

Others fear the UN-backed request for a non-binding advisory opinion will have limited impact — and it could take the UN’s highest court months, or even years, to deliver.

The hearings at the scenic Peace Palace come days after a bitterly negotiated climate deal at the COP29 summit in Azerbaijan.

Wealthy polluting countries ultimately agreed to find at least $300 billion a year by 2035 to help poorer nations transition to cleaner energy sources and prepare for increasing climate impacts such as extreme weather.

Developing countries condemned the pledge as too little, too late, and the summit’s final deal failed to include a global pledge to move away from burning planet-heating fossil fuels.

– ‘Pivotal moment’ –


“We are on the frontline of climate change impact,” said Ralph Regenvanu, special envoy for Vanuatu, which has been driving the ICJ initiative along with neighbouring island states.

“Our call for an advisory opinion from the ICJ on climate change is at a pivotal moment… one that sets clear the international legal obligations for climate action,” he told journalists ahead of the hearings.

The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution last year that referred two key climate questions to the international judges.

Firstly, it asked, what obligations do states have under international law to protect the Earth’s climate system from pollutant greenhouse gas emissions?

Secondly, what are the legal consequences of these obligations in cases where states, “by their acts and omissions, have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment”?

The second question also was linked to the legal responsibilities states have for harm caused by climate change to small, more vulnerable countries and their populations.

This applies especially to countries under threat from rising sea levels and harsh weather patterns in places like the Pacific Ocean.

– Record high emissions –

Joie Chowdhury, a senior lawyer at the US- and Swiss-based Center for International Environmental Law, said climate advocates did not expect the ICJ’s opinion “to provide very specific answers”.

Instead, she predicted the court would provide “a legal blueprint… on which more specific questions can be decided”.

The judges’ opinion, which she expected some time next year, “will inform climate litigation on domestic, national and international levels”.

Some of the world’s largest carbon polluters — including the world’s top three greenhouse gas emitters, China, the United States and India — will be among the 98 countries and 12 organisations expected to make submissions to the court.

The world agreed in 2015 to try and limit global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

But it did not prescribe how to achieve that and it is nowhere near on track.

Preliminary scientific data from the Global Carbon Project, published during the COP29 negotiations, showed emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas rose this year to a new record high.

No comments: