This is a certainly advisory but unprecedented opinion, intended to influence global jurisprudence. States that violate their climatic obligations commit an act “Illicit” And could be claimed repairs by the most affected countries, the International Court of Justice (CIJ) concluded on Wednesday July 23.
The highest UN jurisdiction, based in Haye, established unanimously in this opinion, initially requested by students on the Vanuatu archipelago, a legal interpretation of international law, of which legislators, lawyers and judges around the world can now seize to change laws or attack states for their climate inaction.
The opinion is “A historical milestone for climate action”Haded the climate minister of Vanuatu, Ralph Regenvanu, at the end of the hearing on the steps of the Peace Palace, saying that he would inspire that he would inspire “New judicial actions” in the world.
The degradation of the climate, caused by greenhouse gas emissions, is a “Urgent and existential threat”said judge Yuji Iwasawa, president of the court, during a two -hour speech.
The Court rejected the idea, defended by large polluting countries, that existing climatic treaties – and in particular the annual COP negotiation process – were sufficient. States have “Strict obligations to protect the climate system”he argued. In accordance with small island countries, he confirmed that the climate should be “Protected for present and future generations” – While the major polluting countries absolutely refused to legally recognize the rights of individuals not yet born.
Causal link
The most substantial part of the opinion, and which will arouse the most resistance among rich countries, stems according to the court of these obligations: the compensations due to the countries ravaged by the climate. There « violation » climatic obligations by a state constitute “An internationally illicit fact engaging its responsibility”a declared Yuji Iwasawa. “The legal consequences resulting from the commission of an internationally illicit fact may include (…) The full compensation for the damage suffered by the states injured in the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction ”also said the president of the CIJ.
But the courtyard place the bar high: a direct and certain causal link must be established “Between the illicit fact and the damage” ; A link certainly difficult to establish before a jurisdiction, but “Not impossible” However, conclude the fifteen judges of the CIJ.
This is the fifth unanimous opinion of the Court in eighty years, according to the UN.
It will take time for the lawyers to fully digest the opinion of 140 pages, and even more to see if national courts seize it. But already many voices, experts and activists, underline the historical character of the text.
Newsletter
“Human warmth”
How to deal with the climate challenge? Every week, our best articles on the subject
Register
It is “A historic victory for climate justice”reacted, to the Agency France-Presse (AFP), the former Special Rapporteur of the UN for Human Rights and the Environment, David Boyd. The interpretation by the Court of States Obligations “Will be a catalyst to accelerate climate action”.
“For the first time, the highest court in the world established that states had a legal obligation to prevent any climate damage, but also to repair it fully”commented one of the most expert lawyers on the subject at the London School of Economics, Joana Setzer. The opinion, according to her, “Strengthens the legal basis for climate justice”.
“Major decision”
The climatologists most disappointed with global political action are of the same opinion. “It’s a major decision”said, to AFP, Johan Rockström, director of one of the most recognized European institutes on the climate, the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. Each country can “Being responsible” Before the courts, even if he is not a signatory to the UN treaties, he adds.
For the American climatologist Michael Mann, the opinion is timely while Donald Trump continues to dismantle the building built by his democratic predecessors to reduce greenhouse gases. The advice of the courtyard “Made from the United States, and some petro-states like Saudi Arabia and Russia, an outlaw country that threatens our peoples and our planet in the name of the profits of fossil fuels”he said to AFP
The opinion will certainly be “Tested” In court in the United States, predicted for AFP the professor at the Vermont law school, Pat Parenteau. “It will not succeed with the current Supreme Court, but it is not permanent”.
Many NGOs and activists impatiently awaited this opinion, frustrated by the inaction or the slowness of large polluting countries to reduce their combustion of oil, coal and gas.
Two questions
The Court had to organize the biggest audiences in its history, with more than 100 nations and groups speaking, in December at the Palais de la Paix.
The climate battle is investing more and more the courts, whether national or international, to force climate action of a magnitude that political negotiations cannot trigger-a fortiori in a period when Europe and the United States slow down or decide on their commitments.
The annual COPs have certainly made it possible to influence the warming forecasts, but also very insufficient to hold the limit objective of 2 ° C compared to the pre -industrial era, set by the 2015 Paris Agreement. The world is already at least 1.3 ° C of warming.
International law is built with such opinions, explained to the France-Presse (AFP) agency Andrew Raine, of the legal department of United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). “They clarify the way in which international law applies to the climate crisis, which has repercussions on national courts, legislative processes and public debates. »»
