The General Assembly asked the court to give its opinion on two questions: What obligations do governments have under international law to protect the Earth’s climate system from greenhouse gases? And what are the “legal consequences” if governments have failed in their obligations and “caused significant harm”?
The judges are seeking a wide range of views, and representatives from more than 100 countries and international organisations have asked to speak. They include those from small island nations threatened by sea-level rise; countries that are working to phase out fossil fuel use with clean energy; and major producers who depend on income from coal, oil and gas.
Although the General Assembly engaged the court, the idea for the hearings initially came from a group of law students from Vanuatu and other Pacific islands. Others then joined in from the Caribbean and Asia.
The group argued that small nations like theirs had done little to contribute to a heating planet but were battered by catastrophic consequences of climate change. Such nations have run up high debts to cope with cyclones, crumbling infrastructure, loss of arable land and vanishing fish stocks as seawater warms. A number of islands will simply drown.That vocal group has since expanded into an alliance with developing countries to use all means available for their struggle, in particular the law.They argue that the list of broken promises and reneged-on commitments is long, and that suing for damages is the best way to be taken seriously.
Although the court’s advisory opinion on the legal questions will be nonbinding, the court’s stature means the opinion will be an authoritative statement to provide guidance for or put more pressure on policymakers.
