The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) requiring states to acknowledge and put into practice their obligations under international climate change laws raises a measure of hope, particularly for low-lying small island states. It is those countries that are most threatened by inundation from sea water, which has been surging towards and occupying those states with low-level shoreline islands for over a decade.
The ICJ says “an existential threat” exists to those states and indeed the world population everywhere, as the glaciers melt and plunge into the oceans and seas around them. Moreover, the world court makes it clear that the “climate obligations are not aspirational—they are legal, substantive, and enforceable.”
The effect is to say to all countries, more so to the industrial nations, which are the major polluters of the atmosphere through their fossil usage to manufacture and fabricate consumer durables, that they have to go beyond rhetoric and promises made at international conferences.
Under the advisory opinion, the requirement of all states is for them “to co-operate internationally, and uphold fundamental rights in the face of escalating climate risks.” And just in case there are those countries whose leaders feel they are exceptional to the opinion, the ICJ makes clear “these duties extend to all states, and the climate system must be protected for present and future generations.”
The duty of those states is not only to establish national climate plans under the Paris Agreement, but they also have a responsibility to regulate private actors and provide support to more vulnerable nations.
The international court has made it clear to leaders who feel their countries are beyond the requirement that “inaction, or failure to act decisively, may constitute an internationally wrongful act—triggering consequences under the law of state responsibility.”
As the reports of the UN climate scientists have been stating over the period of intense concern, the continuing and increasing release of toxic gases into the atmosphere, through the production of industrial goods using fossil fuels, is endangering the existence of the planet. What is worse is that while small-island states with low-lying coastlines are most vulnerable, they are not the major polluters.
The critical issue continues to be whether the leaders of the industrial states will heed the warning and carry out their obligations to transform their industrial production methods.
And while a few industrial producers have reduced their greenhouse emissions in recent times, China, the United States, Russia, India, several European Union countries and Brazil together release 62.7 per cent of the total greenhouse gases.
The bad news continues to be that global emissions have increased by 0.8 per cent, according to the scientific publication Our World in Data.
It is worth noting that immediately on his return to office, US President Donald Trump revoked measures taken by his predecessor to curtail excessive industrial production.
The question remains whether mankind will ultimately convert in large measure to green production and away from the fossil fuel usage of the present. Many developing countries think it’s unfair to them not to be able to follow the pattern of industrial production which made Europe, America and parts of Asia wealthy. It is left to be seen, therefore, if the main culprits will make the adjustment for the betterment of the entire world.
