World Court To Announce Climate Change Opinion On July 23

At the request of the United Nations General Assembly, the International Court of Justice will determine the existing financial liability of countries for their contribution to climate change and what actions countries must take to prevent climate change. After over two years of proceedings, the ICJ will announce its Advisory Opinion relating to the Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change on July 23 at 3pm CEST. While the opinion is non-binding, it will shape the future debate over climate change policy.

The ICJ was established in 1945 through the UN Charter to handle legal disputes between nations. Known as the World Court, it is an outlet for countries to settle civil disputes through a neutral court. The ICJ is composed of 15 judges elected by the UNGA and UN Council to serve a term of nine years. A country may only have one judge serving on the ICJ at a time.

On March 29, 2023, at the request of Vanuatu, the UNGA asked the ICJ to issue an advisory opinion on the legal obligations of countries in preventing climate change. The opinion, while non-binding, will give an indicator of how the Court may interpret future climate related litigation and guide future legislative development. The UNGA posed two questions to the ICJ:

“What are the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for States and for present and future generations”?

“What are the legal consequences under these obligations for States where they, by their acts and omissions, have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment, with respect to: (i) States, including, in particular, small island developing States, which due to their geographical circumstances and level of development, are injured or specially affected by or are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change? (ii) Peoples and individuals of the present and future generations affected by the adverse effects of climate change?”

The UN sent an initial package of relevant laws and treaties. The Court determined that members states and international organizations should also given the opportunity to weigh in on their legal arguments and opinions through written statements. The initial written statements were due on March 22, 2024.

Soon after, the Court announced they had received a record high 91 written statements from member states and international organizations. Each of those parties had an opportunity to file a written response to the original statements. Originally, the date set for responses was June 29, but the Court extended the deadline to August 15.

Over 100 countries and parties presented oral statements in 30 minute increments from December 2 to 13, 2024. On December 2, Vanuatu and the Melanesian Spearhead Group opened the hearings giving, in essence, an opening argument.

Legal arguments in the written and oral statements begin with the United Nations Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. Large countries, including the United States, Australia, and Germany, argued that the creation of a treaty that specifically addresses climate change overrides any other international law on the subject. This is known as lex specialis. Therefore, no additional legal obligations exist that may create a call for reparations or action not directly negotiated.

Developing countries argue that the UNCCC and the Paris Agreement are a starting point, but that the impacts of climate change violate human rights under international common law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As a result, those countries that contribute to climate change, through the production of fossil fuels and GHG emissions, should pay reparations to low lying and developing nations that are “adversely impacted” by climate change.

Following the oral statements, four judges posed followup questions: Judge Sarah Cleveland of the USA, Judge Dire Tladi of South Africa, Judge Bogdan-Lucian Auresco of Romania, and Judge Hilary Charlesworth of Australia.

Generally, Judge Cleveland asked what obligations oil producing countries have to reduce GHG emissions. Judge Tladi asked countries to address if the obligations of the Paris Agreement are procedural or binding. Judge Auresco asked for further explanation of the argument that there exists a right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment in international law. Judge Charesworth asked about the impact of the Paris Agreement on existing international law relating to compensation.

Parties were given until December 20, 2025 to file written responses. Those responses were posted in January, then the Court went silent on this matter.

On July 7, the Court announced that it will deliver its advisory opinion on July 23, at 3Pm CEST. The opinion will be read by Judge Iwasawa Yuji, the President of the
Court, in the Great Hall of Justice at the Peace Palace in The Hague. The reading will be streamed on the Court’s website in English and French.