The 193-member UN General Assembly (UNGA) has adopted a resolution responding to the 2025 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that clarified States’ climate change-related obligations and the consequences of their breach. The resolution welcomes the advisory opinion as “an authoritative contribution to the clarification of existing international law” and initiates political follow-up to the landmark ruling.

In its advisory opinion, the ICJ ruled that countries have a duty to protect the environment and the climate system from anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and that they may be held legally responsible for the failure to do so. While the advisory opinion is not binding, it carries significant legal and moral authority in setting a clear legal benchmark for States’ actions.

Spearheaded by Vanuatu and a group of like-minded countries, the resolution was put to a vote on 20 May 2026. Following the UNGA’s rejection of two proposed amendments to the text, the resolution passed by a vote of 141 in favor to eight against (Belarus, Iran, Israel, Liberia, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, the US, and Yemen), with 28 abstentions.

Enjoying this article? Make sure you always catch our coverage by subscribing to our SDG Update newsletter.

Titled, ‘Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of States in respect of climate change’ (A/80/L.65), the resolution calls upon all States to comply with international law to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic GHG emissions, by preventing significant harm, cooperating with each other in good faith, and protecting human rights.

In the resolution, the UNGA requests that the Secretary-General prepare a report in 2027 on ways to advance compliance and decides to include a follow-up to the advisory opinion in the provisional agenda of the UNGA’s 83rd session in 2028.

Highlighting the Assembly’s complementary role before the UNGA plenary, Vanuatu said the resolution does not assign responsibility to any State or reopen, replace, or compete with the international climate regime. On the contrary, he said, it reaffirms the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement on climate change as “the primary legal instruments and intergovernmental forums for the global response to climate change.”

The US rejected the notion of giving legal or operational weight to the ICJ advisory opinion, underscoring that “the resolution improperly treats the Court’s opinion as irrefutably authoritative and as setting out binding obligations on States.” Viewing the resolution as “highly problematic in calling on States to comply with so-called obligations that are based on non-binding conclusions of the Court on which UN Member States’ views diverge,” she characterized the Court’s legal approach as an overreach into State sovereignty and cautioned that “such an expansive legal rule would impermissibly interfere with each State’s sovereign rights to regulate and manage its own energy policy.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres welcomed the resolution as “a powerful affirmation of international law, climate justice, science, and the responsibility of states to protect people from the escalating climate crisis.”

Like all UNGA resolutions, the resolution on the ICJ advisory opinion does not carry binding force. However, it reflects States’ wide agreement on the legal weight attached to the unanimous advisory opinion. [UN Meetings Coverage: 20 May 2026] [UN News Story] [SDG Knowledge Hub Story on UNGA’s Request for ICJ Advisory Opinion on Climate Change] [SDG Knowledge Hub Story on UNGA’s Resolution Recognizing Human Right to Clean, Healthy, and Sustainable Environment]