ICJ Prepares to Hear Oral Arguments in Climate Advisory Proceedings

The public hearings in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory proceedings to clarify legal obligations of States in respect of climate change will provide an opportunity for UN Member States and authorized organizations to make statements in support of their written submissions. The ICJ advisory opinion is expected to provide a clear benchmark on the scope of States’ obligations under international law.

The oral hearings are scheduled to take place from 2-13 December 2024 at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the Netherlands, the seat of the Court, a little more than a week after the conclusion of the UN Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC COP 29) in Baku, Azerbaijan.

According to an ICJ press release, 98 States and 12 international organizations have indicated they intend to participate in the oral proceedings. The schedule of the hearings is available here. The explanatory note on the procedure followed by the ICJ with regard to requests for advisory opinions is here. Earlier press releases related to the proceedings are here.

On 29 March 2023, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a resolution (A/RES/77/276), spearheaded by Vanuatu and backed by more than 100 countries. In it, the Assembly requests the ICJ to give an advisory opinion on the following questions:

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 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for States and for present and future generations?
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: a) States, including small island developing States (SIDS), 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? b) Peoples and individuals of the present and future generations affected by the adverse effects of climate change?

The UN Secretary-General transmitted the request for an advisory opinion to the Court by a letter dated 12 April 2023.

On 20 April 2023, the President of the Court decided that the UN and its Member States were “likely to be able to furnish information on the questions submitted to the Court for an advisory opinion.”

In addition to Member States, the Court authorized the following organizations to participate in the proceedings: the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN); the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (COSIS); the EU; the African Union (AU); the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC); the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS); the Melanesian Spearhead Group; the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency; the Pacific Community; the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF); the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS); the Parties to the Nauru Agreement Office; and the World Health Organization (WHO). The Cook Islands and the State of Palestine, which are not UN Member States, were also authorized to participate in the proceedings.

According to the press release, the Court received 91 written statements and 63 written comments from States and international organizations. Pursuant to the Rules of the Court, the ICJ “may decide to make the written statements, written comments and annexed documents accessible to the public on or after the opening of the oral proceedings in the case.”

The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the UN. While its advisory opinions are not legally binding, they can clarify the rights and obligations of States under international law and, as such, carry significant legal weight and authority. The Court’s ruling is expected to provide a clear legal benchmark and remove any ambiguity surrounding countries’ obligations under international law in respect of climate change. This would aid in strengthening multilateral negotiations, accelerate redress of loss and damage, and pin down a fast mitigation target.

At the SDG Knowledge Hub, we have been working to raise awareness and build momentum and knowledge around the ICJ advisory opinion on obligations of States in respect of climate change and to promote a better understanding of the implications of the advisory opinion among sustainable development decision makers.

Our publications have discussed the origins of the ICJ advisory opinion, including the role of Pacific Island youth activism and the youth-led campaign behind the push for the ICJ advisory opinion; the implications of the relevant proceedings before other international courts, including the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) advisory opinion; and the legally binding obligations of States in respect of climate change.

Small island States’ access to justice, reparation for climate change-related damage under international law, the future of climate responsibility, and human rights and science perspectives were also among the topics discussed. We reflected on the way the ICJ proceedings were picked up in the AOSIS Declaration on Sea Level Rise and Statehood and in the communiqué of the 53rd Pacific Islands Forum, and explored ways to reprioritize climate action through human rights law.

IISD’s Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB) team will provide daily coverage of the oral hearings, along with a summary and analysis of the proceedings.

* * *

This story is part of a project that seeks to raise awareness and build momentum and knowledge around the ICJ advisory opinion on obligations of States in respect of climate change and to promote a better understanding of the implications of the advisory opinion among sustainable development decision makers.