Summarised by Centrist
In a sweeping unanimous opinion, the International Court of Justice has declared that governments may be committing internationally wrongful acts by failing to prevent climate change.
It also found that fossil fuel subsidies and emissions could violate basic human rights.
The court stopped short of naming specific nations but left the door open for future lawsuits, including over historical emissions.
The opinion followed a campaign led by law students from Pacific Island nations, with Vanuatu’s climate envoy telling the court his country was “on the frontline of a crisis we did not create.” The court agreed, stating that environmental protection is a prerequisite for human rights and that the legal consequences of inaction could be serious.
While non-binding, the ruling could influence courts around the world, where lawsuits over climate policy, fossil fuel companies, and human rights are gaining traction. The decision goes further than many expected: it states all countries are legally obligated to meet the 1.5°C warming limit in the Paris Agreement, even if they withdraw.
Payam Akhavan, an international law expert, called the court’s language “remarkable” for explicitly tying climate inaction to potential legal violations.
The ruling follows Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and his administration’s move to end the EPA’s authority over emissions.
Robert Percival, an environmental law professor, said while symbolic, “people will pay a lot of attention.
Read more over at The New York Times
Image: Velvet
