The opinion was requested on 29 March 2023 by the United Nations General Assembly - (Resolution 77/276).
The Resolution requested opinion on two questions
(a) 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?
(b) 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?
(Link to anthropogenic emissions is my addition. Anthropogenic refers to arising from human activity).
The ICJ issued its opinions on 23 July 2025 - Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change
Subsequently, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 80/263 (20 May 2026). There were 141 votes in favour, 8 against and 28 abstentions. Those voting against were Belarus, Iran, Israel, Liberia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the US and Yemen.
The United Kingdom government voted in favour - (UN Voting record).
Further note:
The General Assembly welcomed the unanimous advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 23 July 2025 on the obligations of States in respect of climate change, and affirmed the importance of the Court’s advisory opinion as an authoritative contribution to the clarification of existing international law.
Amongst other things, the May 2026 resolution called upon States to act in accordance with their respective international obligations. The resolution noted
'the court's finding that a breach by a State of any of the obligations identified by the Court in relation to climate change constitutes an internationally wrongful act entailing the responsibility of that State,
that the responsible State is under a continuing duty to perform the obligation breached and that
the legal consequences resulting from the commission of an internationally wrongful act may include the obligations of:
(a) Cessation of the wrongful actions or omissions, if they are continuing;
(b) Providing assurances and guarantees of non‑repetition, if circumstances so require; and
(c) Full reparation to injured States in the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction, provided that the general conditions of the law of State responsibility are met, including that a sufficiently direct and certain causal nexus can be shown between the wrongful act and the injury; ....'
(My emphasis).
Plainly, the point about "full reparation" could prove to be very burdensome although the provisos would have to be met.
General Assembly backs historic World Court climate crisis ruling | UN News
Climate Change at the International Court of Justice - House of Commons Library
Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change
No comments:
Post a Comment