It’s a first step with no clear end to it, but the United Nations this Wednesday opened a door to some hypothetical lawsuits at the International Court of Justice over the effects of climate change. In a resolution approved by the UN General Assembly, countries have asked this body to clarify exactly how far nations’ responsibilities can go in a crisis that particularly hits the most vulnerable countries, which are those with the least resources, against which they can defend themselves against, the consequences of warming of which they are not the main cause.
The resolution was pushed by Vanuatu, a small Pacific island nation that is on the front lines of climate change and whose very survival is at stake. And it was adopted by consensus this Wednesday at the UN Assembly, after more than four years of work and negotiations that have led to the document reaching this vote with the express support of 121 countries. The International Court of Justice is the main judicial body of the UN and is responsible for settling disputes between states. It also issues reports on issues raised by the various United Nations bodies. That’s exactly what the assembly did today: it asked you about responsibility for the climate crisis.
“Reports can bring the urgently needed clarification of existing obligations under international law,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres before the vote. This statement will also help the UN and countries to “take bolder and stronger climate action that our world so desperately needs,” he added.
More information
The document approved by the UN Assembly calls for answers to two questions. The first: “What are the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the climate system and other elements of the environment from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for the benefit of present and future States and generations? The second relates to “what legal consequences these obligations have for states which, through their actions and omissions, have caused significant damage to the climate system and other elements of the environment in relation to other countries”. And special mention is made of small island developing States and “peoples and individuals of present and future generations affected by the adverse effects of climate change”.
With these two questions, the topic of climate justice is fully addressed, something like the responsibility of states not to urgently cut greenhouse gas emissions despite decades of scientific warnings.
Information is the first tool against climate change. Subscribe to her.
subscribe to
The IPCC, the intergovernmental group on climate change, completed its sixth review of the scientific literature last week (the fifth dates back to 2014), and the conclusions were unequivocal. The experts said climate change is “a threat to human well-being and the health of the planet” and that the “window of opportunity” humanity has to ensure “a livable and sustainable future for all” is “fast closing”. The scientists warned that this crisis has caused “widespread adverse effects and loss and damage” to people and nature. And they called for quick and deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to prevent the most catastrophic warming.
The report was a warning to all mankind. But it also addressed the existing inequality in terms of the main causes of the problem and the main victims. “Vulnerable communities, which have historically contributed least to current climate change, are disproportionately affected,” the IPCC summarized. “Between 3,300 and 3,600 million people live in contexts that are highly vulnerable to climate change,” she added. This vulnerability depends not only on geographic area, but also on the socioeconomic situation, which makes populations with fewer resources more vulnerable in the face of extremes. “Increasing extreme weather and climate events have left millions of people vulnerable to acute food insecurity and reduced water security,” the study warns.
“For some countries, climate threats are a death sentence,” Guterres said on Wednesday, stressing the “huge importance” of the now-awaited International Court of Justice decision. In his opinion, these judgments “could have long-lasting effects on the international legal order”. Ishmael Kalsakau, Prime Minister of Vanuatu, has said the International Court of Justice’s response is “not legally binding” but will mark a “constructive path” internationally. “It will have a strong positive impact in the fight against climate change,” he added ahead of the vote.
After years of hesitation – countries have not faced emission cuts for years despite warnings – climate justice is gaining more and more weight on the international agenda. At the recent climate summit in the Egyptian city of Sharm el Sheikh, the least developed nations put pressure on the richest states to secure the establishment of a fund so that the most vulnerable countries can cope with the losses and damage it is causing and will cause climate change.
“Bitter climate injustice is fueling divisions and threatening to paralyze global climate action,” Guterres warned on Wednesday. Because in addition to climate justice, commitments to reduce greenhouse gases are needed from everyone: from the developed countries – those historically responsible – and from the emerging countries such as China, India or Brazil, which are now becoming the main emitters.
Follow CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT on Facebook and Twitteror sign up here to receive our weekly newsletter