International Courts and Climate Change

Context: 

Led by Vanuatu — an island country in the South Pacific Ocean — a group of 16 countries seeks an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the issue of climate change.

Jurisdictions of ICJ:

• The ICJ has two types of jurisdictions: contentious and advisory. 
• Contentious jurisdiction refers to resolving legal disputes between consenting states.
• Under advisory jurisdiction, the UN General Assembly (UNGA), the Security Council (SC) and other specialized bodies of the organization can request the ICJ for an opinion on a legal question. 
• Unlike decisions given under the contentious jurisdiction, the ICJ’s advisory opinions are non-binding. 

Vanuatu’s initiative:

• Small Island Developing (SID) states such as Vanuatu are most vulnerable to rising temperatures and sea levels. 
• Accordingly, in September 2021, Vanuatu launched an initiative, through the UNGA, to seek an advisory opinion from the ICJ to “clarify the legal obligations of all countries to prevent and redress the adverse effects of climate change”. 
• Since then, the initiative has gathered momentum with more than 100 countries backing the idea.

International Initiatives & their impacts:

• The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, but the international community has fallen short of delivering concrete solutions to the problem of climate change.
• Example: The recently concluded 27th UN Climate Change Conference (COP-27) where countries failed to narrow their differences on critical issues such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• The Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (ITLOS), comprising countries like Antigua and Barbuda and Tuvalu.

Legal questions & intentions:

• First, what are the international law obligations of countries toward the protection of the climate system from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for the present and future generations?
• Expectation here is that the ICJ will not only interpret and clarify the existing international climate change law but use the general and customary international law (CIL) to fill the gaps in these treaties. 
• Second, What are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to the climate system?
  This question seeks to determine the price that states should pay for not honoring their international legal obligations on climate change.
• As part of climate justice, there is a long-standing demand for climate reparations.
  The ICJ’s answer to this question can predictably elaborate on the legal principles that might help the operationalisation of the ‘loss and damage’ fund, which was discussed at COP-27. 

Role of ITLOS (Hamburg-based International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea):

• ITLOS has been requested to determine the specific obligations of the countries under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea about preventing, controlling, and reducing pollution of the marine environment. 

Way Forward:

• These advisory opinions are not a panacea. 
• Developed countries and groupings like the G-20 should support these laudable initiatives of the SID states. 
• Environment and climate sustainability are important themes of G-20. India, as the president of the G-20, should take a lead given its relentless emphasis on LiFE (developing environment-friendly lifestyle) campaign.

News Source: The Hindu