Here is what the CIJ’s historical decision on climate change means

For the first time in its history, the International Court of Justice (CIJ) ruled on the responsibility of states in the fight against climate change. Nevertheless, His opinion. For example, celebrated by environmental organizations, serves as a compass to clarify the extent of the legal obligations of countries in matters of protection of the planet … Moreover, and the consequences they are exposed if they try to parade. However, Explanations.

Why Bread Did she take an interest in climate change? – Here what cij's historical decision

Like David against Goliath. Furthermore, a small group of law students from the University of the South Pacific, in the Fiji Islands, was the spearhead of this movement aimed at putting an end to the impunity of here what cij’s historical decision large polluters.

Witnesses of the first line of the climate vagaries. Therefore, these students from different island states of Oceania took the measure of the degradation of their territories and the threats that weigh on their lifestyles and their cultures.

The countries of the South are more vulnerable to climate change when they represent only a fraction of. Meanwhile, greenhouse gas emissions on the planet.

In order to remedy this injustice. Therefore, the students of the group Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change have united their forces so that their demands are heard by the Bread. Their cause. carried by the Vanuatu, has made its way to the General Assembly of the United Nations, where a resolution supported by more than 100 countries has made it possible to seize the Bread.

Do states have legal obligations to do more for the planet? – Here what cij's historical decision

According to the Court, yes. here what cij’s historical decision And these obligations are not circumscribed to international treaties and environmental conventions: they also arise from customary international law. In this way, states that are not stakeholders in these agreements can hardly seek to escape them.

In his decision. the Bread established that the objectives of major agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, may have the force of law. These obligations are. for example, the following:

• Reduce their greenhouse gas emissions (GHG);
• Contribute to the common objective of limiting the increase in temperatures to 1.5 ° C compared to pre -industrial levels.
• prevent environmental damage;
• Guarantee the right to a clean, healthy and lasting environment;
• cooperate in good faith with other countries to protect populations, especially the most vulnerable.

States also have a diligence obligation Who calls them to adopt laws. regulations here what cij’s historical decision in order to better control the activities of the private sector, including those of the petroleum and gas industry.

The Court demonstrated how this mosaic of obligations is articulated. reiterated that they should be interpreted in a harmonious way.

And what happens if a state is lacking in these obligations?

If a country ignores these obligations. this may constitute a Internationally illegal factor a violation of international law, according to the Court. The country in question would therefore be exposed to legal consequences.

To illustrate what could be considered as a Internationally illegal factthe court gives the example of a state that would not take appropriate measures here what cij’s historical decision To protect the climate from anthropogenic emissions from GES. in particular by producing or using fossil fuels or by granting exploration permits or subsidies for fossil fuels.

In addition. the Court reaffirms the right to repair for countries that suffer the impacts of climate change. These could therefore ask the pollutor states to receive compensation, including by paying compensation.

For example. if a state that feels injured manages to demonstrate that the action – or inaction – of a country causes him prejudice, he could then demand that these polluting activities cease or that they are offered the guarantee that they will not happen again.

What will this decision change?

The advisory opinion of Bread is not binding. but it makes an inventory of transgressions which could constitute violations of international law. It therefore establishes a new base of reference. from a legal here what cij’s historical decision point of view, to guide the action of states and to encourage them to more rigor.

In the past. countries whose savings depend on fossil fuels have tended to point the flaws of the agreements of theHim on the climate and to hide behind the argument that membership of these treaties is voluntary. However, the court’s decision comes to deny this idea.

It is a judgment that will eliminate all kinds of distractions. intellectual falsehoods, and which risks having an impact on climatic policies. Despite its optional character, it will allow a voting power relationships.

The opinion also strengthens principles here what cij’s historical decision mentioned in causes that are still awaiting their outcome. This is particularly the case for the La Rose case. brought by 15 young people who accuse the Canadian government of biting their right to enjoy a clean and healthy environment.

Supporters of climate justice hope that this new light will modify the dynamics during the next international negotiations by giving new weapons to the communities most affected by climate disturbances. by strengthening pressure on the states that are originally.

It is for this reason that many environmental groups see it as the end of The era of impunity.

This decision will allow the most vulnerable to make their voices heard in all negotiation rooms. to unlock certain controversial issues, in particular those relating to fossil fuels, funding as well as losses and damages.