Climate justice campaigners have condemned the US after the world’s largest historic greenhouse gasoline emitter argued in opposition to international locations being legally obliged to fight the local weather disaster.
The US intervention got here on Wednesday as a part of the historic local weather listening to on the worldwide court docket of justice (ICJ) in The Hague, the place island nations and different climate-vulnerable international locations are calling for rich polluting nations most liable for local weather breakdown to be held legally accountable.
Climate disasters are wreaking havoc throughout the planet, with dwindling hope of the present local weather pledges curbing international temperatures because the US and different fossil gasoline nations proceed to increase manufacturing.
Yet in response to the US, the United Nations framework conference on local weather change (UNFCCC) and 2015 Paris settlement and different present non-binding treaties needs to be preserved and are one of the simplest ways ahead.
The present UN local weather change regime “embodies the clearest, most particular, and essentially the most present expression of states’ consent to be sure by worldwide legislation in respect of local weather change”, Margaret Taylor, authorized adviser on the state division, informed the ICJ judges on Wednesday.
“Any different authorized obligations regarding local weather change mitigation recognized by the court docket needs to be interpreted persistently with the obligations states have beneath this treaty regime,” added Taylor.
Climate justice activists responded with fury.
“Once once more, we witness a disheartening try by the US to evade its obligations as one of many world’s largest polluters,” stated Vishal Prasad, director of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change. “The US is content material with its business-as-usual strategy and has taken each attainable measure to shirk its historic accountability, disregard human rights and reject local weather justice.”
Ashfaq Khalfan, Oxfam America’s local weather justice director, stated: “It is absurd for the Biden administration to argue earlier than the ICJ that international locations would not have clear authorized obligations to cut back carbon air pollution, particularly because it prepares to show over the chief workplace to a confirmed local weather denier like president-elect Trump, whose insurance policies are more likely to deeply hurt US local weather motion.”
Australia, China and Saudi Arabia – main fossil gasoline economies and among the many world’s worst greenhouse gasoline emitters – additionally argued in opposition to authorized accountability that creating nations are pushing for.
After years of campaigning by susceptible nations and the worldwide local weather justice motion, the UN requested the ICJ to supply an advisory opinion on what obligations states need to sort out local weather change and what the authorized penalties might be in the event that they fail to take action. More than 100 international locations and organisations are testifying over the course of two weeks, and lots of hope the hearings will elevate science to the forefront, guaranteeing worldwide legislation displays the realities of local weather breakdown and the pressing want for transformative motion.
ICJ advisory opinions are non-binding however carry important authorized and political weight, and this can seemingly be known as an authoritative doc in future local weather litigation and through worldwide local weather negotiations.
Those most susceptible to local weather change – predominantly Pacific nations led by Vanuatu – are pushing for honest monetary assist and compensation for irreversible loss and harm from the states most accountable as they face an existential risk from rising tides, floods, drought and different local weather disasters.
On Wednesday, Vanuatu’s particular envoy for local weather change, Ralph Regenvanu, stated his nation was “dissatisfied” on the US and others. “These nations, a number of the world’s largest greenhouse gasoline emitters, have pointed to present treaties and commitments which have regrettably didn’t inspire substantial reductions in emissions … these treaties are important, however they can’t be a veil for inaction or an alternative choice to authorized accountability.”
Taylor additionally appeared to dismiss the concept the ICJ ought to suggest in its opinion that historic emitters be held liable for previous air pollution. “An advisory continuing isn’t the means to litigate whether or not particular person states or teams of states have violated obligations pertaining to local weather change previously or bear accountability for reparations … nor would it not be applicable to take action,” she stated.
The ICJ is one in every of three worldwide courts tasked with producing an advisory opinion on the local weather disaster, alongside the worldwide tribunal for the legislation of the ocean (Itlos) and the inter-American court docket of human rights. Itlos discovered earlier this 12 months that greenhouse gases are pollution which states have a obligation to manage – that goes past the UNFCCC. The inter-American court docket held hearings in Barbados and Brazil this 12 months and is anticipated to be the following to publish its opinion. The ICJ ruling will seemingly take many months.
