������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��

What are these proceedings about?

In short, they are about the legal obligations countries have to protect the climate, and, should they fail to comply with them, whether they could face any legal consequences.

This historic proceeding started with a in March 2023, in which the body asked the International Court of Justice to weigh in on the following key questions:

1. 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;

2. 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:
   • 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?
   • Peoples and individuals of the present and future generations affected by the adverse effects of climate change?

What is ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s role, and why is it important that it participate?

During this type of process – known as “”, or when the ICJ is asked for a opinion on a matter of international law – the court invites States and those international organisations that would be able to provide relevant information to help inform the outcome.

������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� plays an important and distinct role that is of value to the court – as an organisation with 1,400 State and non-State members, and its related Commissions and bodies encompassing some 17,000 experts with expertise on a range of topics related to climate and biodiversity. The Court authorised ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� to participate in these proceedings .

In supporting ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��, ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL) has prepared all ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� documents in the proceedings: the request to the Court to authorise ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� to participate, the written statement submitted in March 2024 and written comments submitted in August 2024, as well as the oral statements in December 2024. This has been a massive multi-year, multi-stage process that involved a large team of lawyers from the commission – all of whom provided their expertise pro bono to the ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��. It also involved large-scale consultations across the Union.

������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� is the legal authority on the status of the natural world and the measures needed to safeguard it. This includes legal measures, as the governance tool to guide behaviour – drawing on the expertise of the ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� WCEL.

It is important that ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� – as an international organisation – weigh in on these proceedings with the authority and expertise the Union has. These proceedings are a possibility to shape the law that safeguards our planet, its people, nature and our climate system. ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s voice is crucial as it is based on sound science and sound legal methodology; it is objective and unbiased.

Why is this process important and historic?

What makes this entire case important and historic is simple: This is the first time that the ICJ, which is known as the World Court, has taken up the issue of climate change and countries’ responsibilities with regards to addressing it.

While there’s been a growing trend of national courts taking up climate change-related cases – especially in the wake of the 2015 Paris Agreement – it’s still relatively rare for international tribunals to do so. In fact, according to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in New York City, there are only so far.

Earlier this year the International Tribunal for Law of the Sea (ITLOS) issued its own , where it said that States must “take all necessary measures to reduce, prevent and control” greenhouse gas emissions and that countries have a legal obligation to assist developing States in addressing pollution of the marine environment by such emissions. ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� also participated with a legal team led by ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� WCEL in the proceedings before ITLOS.

The opinion by the ICJ could likely serve as an indicator of how the Court may influence future climate related litigation in national courts and guide future legislative development by parliaments.��And although ICJ advisory opinions are not legally binding, they possess moral weight, add clarifications on countries’ international obligations and can affect in the long-term the existing international legal order. As a result, the opinion of the ICJ is expected to push UN Member States to uphold their climate commitments.��

What is ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s key message?

Every state has the obligation under international law to do its utmost to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to hold warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, and to limit and reverse any overshoot as much as possible. The standard of conduct is of objective, stringent due diligence and varies according to States’ evolving responsibilities and capabilities. This obligation stems from parallel, complementary, and cumulative international legal sources, including the Paris Agreement, Human Rights treaties, the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and customary international law.

The Union also takes a rights-based approach to the question of States’ obligations, demonstrating that States must adopt timely and adequate measures to protect human life – including the lives and rights of future generations.

What are the potential outcomes?

The court will ultimately have to answer the questions that the General Assembly posed. It will have to clarify the legal obligations and responsibility of States to protect the climate. And it could find that, in failing protect the climate, countries could face legal consequences.

Either way, the court’s ultimate ruling will be an “”, which means that it will not be legally binding on any State. Still, “the Court’s advisory opinions nevertheless carry great legal weight and moral authority.”

What do we hope the Advisory Opinion will achieve?

International law on what the obligations of states are to protect the climate system is important – but currently lacks some clarity. While it is found in different international treaties, most of them do not even mention “environment” or “climate change”. It is therefore very important to get a clarification from the ICJ on which obligations states have under international law to safeguard the climate system. An ICJ Advisory Opinion can be instrumental in clarifying this important aspect.

An opinion from the Court could also send a powerful message to States and other actors responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, emphasising the urgent need for deep, rapid, and sustained reductions aimed at reaching the goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

What is the timeline of this process?

• On 29 March 2023 the UN General Assembly requested that the ICJ issue an Advisory Opinion on the obligations of States with regards to climate change.
• On 14 June 2023 the ICJ granted ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s request to participate in the case.
• On 19 March 2024 Prof Christina Voigt, Chair of the ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s WCEL, presented ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s written submission to the Court.
• On 15 August 2024��Prof Francesco Sindico, the Co-Chair of the WCEL��Climate Change Law Specialist Group, presented ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ��’s responses to the written statements of other States and Organisations to the Registrar of the Court.
• On 2 December 2024 the oral hearings at the ICJ started.
• On 13 December 2024 ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� is granted 30 minutes to deliver its oral arguments in the case. ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� Director General Dr Grethel Aguilar, Prof Voigt, and Prof Sindico will represent ������ϲʿ�������ֳ�ֱ�� at the proceedings.
• The Advisory Opinion from the ICJ is expected in 2025.