Presenting the 133-page opinion at the Peace Palace, ICJ President Yūji Iwasawa warned that unchecked climate breakdown poses “an urgent existential threat” to natural ecosystems and communities worldwide.
In a landmark advisory opinion issued Wednesday, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) declared that countries which fail to curb greenhouse-gas emissions—particularly from fossil fuel production, consumption, exploration licences or subsidies—“may constitute an international wrongful act” and could be ordered to pay reparations or make restitution for climate damage.
RELEVANT SUSTAINABLE GOALS
Landmark Opinion Delivered at The Hague
Presenting the 133-page opinion at the Peace Palace, ICJ President Yūji Iwasawa warned that unchecked climate breakdown poses “an urgent existential threat” to natural ecosystems and communities worldwide. Though advisory opinions are non-binding, the court’s unanimous ruling is regarded as an authoritative interpretation of existing international law.
For the first time, the world’s top court explicitly targets fossil fuels as a primary driver of anthropogenic climate harm. States that permit continued production and consumption of coal, oil or gas—or subsidize and license such activities—could face legal liability for resulting environmental damage. The ruling fills a gap left by the Paris Agreement, whose 2015 text omitted any direct reference to fossil fuels until a 2023 pledge to “transition away” from them—language later softened by some governments.
Vulnerable Nations and Campaigners Celebrate
Outside the court, Vanuatu’s Minister for Climate Change, Ralph Regenvanu, hailed the ruling as a “milestone moment for climate justice” that validates decades-long pleas from Pacific island states. “It confirms that states have legal obligations to act on climate change,” he said, predicting the opinion will bolster climate negotiations and spur new lawsuits.
Barrister Harj Narulla, counsel for the Solomon Islands, noted the opinion outlines reparations that include rebuilding damaged infrastructure, restoring ecosystems and monetary compensation. “Big emitters now face the possibility of being successfully sued,” he said, underscoring the ruling’s potential to reshape international climate litigation.
The ICJ opinion also holds states responsible for regulating corporate actors whose operations contribute to global warming. Governments must now ensure private-sector compliance with climate obligations, tightening oversight of industries that drive emissions.
From Law Students to Global Policy
Prompted by a 2023 UN mandate—championed by a group of Pacific island law students and diplomatic efforts led by Vanuatu—the case became the largest ever heard by the ICJ. Vishal Prasad, one of the students who lobbied Vanuatu to bring the request, described the opinion as “a strong tool to carry on the fight for climate justice.”
UN Secretary-General António Guterres praised the court’s finding as “a victory for our planet and for the power of young people to make a difference,” urging nations to root all climate policies in the Paris Agreement’s goals.
With this advisory opinion, countries and corporations now face heightened legal and moral pressure to accelerate their transitions away from fossil fuels. While not legally binding, the ruling sets a new benchmark—for negotiations, for national legislation and for potential reparations cases—signaling a turning point in global efforts to hold major emitters to account.
You may also be interested in :
Fast-Growing, Global-South Cities Are ‘Strikingly Underrepresented’ In Climate Research
