Quick summary:
• The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has begun hearings to address states’ legal obligations to combat climate change and the consequences of failing to act, driven by Pacific Island nations led by Vanuatu.
• The case originated from law students in Vanuatu and was referred to the ICJ by a unanimous UN General Assembly resolution, marking a historic first for climate accountability.
• Pacific nations, already experiencing severe climate impacts such as rising sea levels and cyclones, argue the case is critical to securing justice and resources for recovery.
• The ICJ will address two key questions: states’ obligations under international law to combat climate change and the consequences for nations causing harm.
• Wealthy nations and major greenhouse gas emitters are expected to push for minimal legal responsibilities during the hearings, while smaller nations seek broader accountability.
• While the ICJ’s advisory opinion will be non-binding, it could significantly influence climate negotiations, legal cases against polluters, and international definitions of terms like “climate finance.”
• Advocates like Cynthia Houniuhi emphasize the case as a symbol of hope for vulnerable nations, with the potential to reshape global climate action and justice.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has commenced hearings in a landmark case that could redefine how nations are held accountable for their role in the climate crisis. The case, spearheaded by Pacific Island nations led by Vanuatu, seeks clarity on states’ obligations to prevent climate harm under international law and the consequences for failing to act. With participation from nearly 100 countries, this unprecedented legal action highlights the urgency of addressing climate change as it reshapes lives, devastates ecosystems, and threatens entire nations.
The case’s origins trace back to a classroom at the University of the South Pacific in Vanuatu, where a group of law students sought a legal pathway to compel global climate action. Led by Cynthia Houniuhi, now president of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, the students proposed seeking an ICJ advisory opinion to define nations’ responsibilities under international law. Their idea gained momentum when Vanuatu’s then-foreign minister, Ralph Regenvanu, championed the initiative. In March 2023, the UN General Assembly unanimously referred the case to the ICJ, marking a historic first for climate accountability.
“This case is really another example of Pacific Island countries being global leaders on the climate crisis,” said Wesley Morgan, a research associate at UNSW’s Institute for Climate Risk and Response.
For Pacific Island nations, the climate crisis is not a future threat but a current and escalating reality. Rising sea levels, saltwater intrusion, and increasingly severe cyclones are already devastating communities. Vanuatu, one of the world’s most disaster-prone nations, experienced three cyclones in 2023 alone, leaving schools operating out of UNICEF tents.
“We need the resources that other countries were able to attain and become rich through fossil fuel development that caused this crisis we are now facing,” said Ralph Regenvanu, now Vanuatu’s special envoy on climate change.
The ICJ hearings come on the heels of COP29, where financial commitments from wealthier nations fell short of what Pacific countries needed to address climate harm. Critics, including Papua New Guinea, described the agreements as “empty gestures” that failed to meet the scale of the crisis.
“We represent communities where every fraction of a degree of warming translates to real losses: homes swallowed by the sea, crops destroyed by salinity, and cultures at risk of extinction,” said Dylan Kava, regional facilitator at the Pacific Island Climate Action Network.
The ICJ will address two critical questions:
1. What are states’ obligations under international law to combat climate change and protect the environment?
2. What are the legal consequences for nations that fail to act?
Vanuatu opened the hearings on December 4, with testimony underscoring the existential stakes for Pacific nations. Over the next two weeks, nearly 100 countries will present their arguments, each allotted just 30 minutes to make their case.
The hearings aim to provide clarity on contentious issues such as defining “climate finance,” which developing nations argue should exclude loans. An advisory opinion could also offer guidance on aligning international agreements, like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with climate obligations.
While the ICJ’s advisory opinions are non-binding, they carry significant weight in influencing international law and climate negotiations. A favorable opinion could bolster litigation efforts by smaller nations against major polluters and strengthen their positions in future negotiations.
Not all nations are aligned with the goals of the case. Major greenhouse gas emitters, including the United States, have expressed skepticism about using legal mechanisms to address climate change, arguing diplomacy is a better approach. During the hearings, these nations are expected to push for a narrow interpretation of their legal responsibilities.
Some experts caution against overestimating the case’s impact. “When we’re looking at 15 judges, when we’re looking at a wide range of legal treaties and conventions upon which the court is being asked to address these questions, it’s really difficult to speculate at this point,” said Professor Donald Rothwell of Australian National University.
The ICJ’s eventual opinion, expected by late 2025, could be weakened by a split decision or limited scope. However, recent rulings, such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea’s decision affirming nations’ obligations to protect oceans from climate harm, offer hope for a favorable outcome.
The path to the ICJ hearings reflects the resilience and determination of Pacific Island nations and their advocates. Despite the challenges, this case represents a crucial step in holding nations accountable for their contributions to the climate crisis.
“This is hope for our people,” said Cynthia Houniuhi, reflecting on the journey from a classroom in Port Vila to the Peace Palace in The Hague.
For nations like Vanuatu, the stakes extend far beyond the courtroom. An ICJ advisory opinion could provide the legal foundation for more effective climate negotiations, litigation, and justice for vulnerable communities facing existential threats.
“We want justice in terms of allowing us to have the same capacity to respond quickly after catastrophic events,” Regenvanu emphasized.
Visit the Climate Protest Tracker as a one-stop source for following global trends in climate policy protests.
COMMENTS