The International Court of Justice (ICJ) recently concluded historic hearings aimed at addressing States’ legal obligations regarding climate change and the consequences of failing to meet them. Held from 2 to 13 December 2024 in The Hague, Netherlands, the proceedings sought to clarify international law and set a precedent for global climate action.
Satendra Prasad, Fiji’s former ambassador to the United Nations, called the case a landmark moment for global climate justice. In a post on LinkedIn he observed:
“The outcome will shape the future of global climate action.”
The case originated in 2021 when Vanuatu, supported by the youth group Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, launched an initiative to seek an ICJ advisory opinion.
The Pacific island nation, along with a coalition of small island developing States, pushed for the opinion to address the urgent climate crisis threatening their existence. The United Nations General Assembly referred the matter to the ICJ in March 2023, with backing from 132 countries.
The hearings represented the largest proceedings in the ICJ’s history, with 97 countries and 11 international organisations participating. A record 91 written submissions and 62 comments had been filed with the court before the hearings.
Nations and organisations used the hearings to expand on their written arguments, with small island States emphasising their unique vulnerability to rising sea levels and extreme weather events.
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres also underlined the significance of the case, stating that the ICJ’s advisory opinion could “help the General Assembly, the United Nations and Member States take the bolder and stronger climate action that our world so desperately needs.”
Guterres emphasised that the opinion could guide not only the actions of States in their relations with one another but also their responsibilities to their own citizens.
“It could also guide the actions and conduct of States in their relations with each other, as well as towards their own citizens. This is essential.”
Although the ICJ’s advisory opinions are not legally binding, they carry considerable moral and legal authority. Such opinions have the potential to clarify international law, influence future judicial proceedings, and shape global climate negotiations. The court’s decision is expected to be referenced in climate lawsuits worldwide, potentially holding nations accountable for failing to address the climate crisis.
Support Our Journalism
The global Indian Diaspora and Australia’s multicultural communities need fair, non-hyphenated, and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. The Australia Today—with exceptional reporters, columnists, and editors—is doing just that. Sustaining this requires support from wonderful readers like you.
Whether you live in Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States of America, or India you can take a paid subscription by clicking Patreon
