I. Introduction
Climate change litigation has rapidly emerged as a powerful tool for holding governments and corporations accountable for environmental degradation. While most climate-related lawsuits have traditionally occurred in domestic courts, international courts and tribunals are increasingly becoming crucial venues for addressing systemic and transboundary climate harms. Thus, this article explores the rise of climate change litigation in international judicial bodies, analyses landmark cases, delves into the legal and procedural challenges these cases face, and discusses the future trajectory of this dynamic field.
II. The Emergence of International Climate Litigation
International climate litigation encompasses legal actions initiated in global judicial institutions to enforce compliance with climate obligations delineated in international law. These cases typically draw on various frameworks, including human rights frameworks, environmental treaties, and customary international law.
Human Rights Frameworks: Courts often invoke the right to life, health, and a clean environment as fundamental principles being violated.
Environmental Treaties: Agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change provide legal foundations for claims.
Customary International Law: The duty to prevent transboundary environmental harm serves as another critical basis for legal arguments.
Unlike domestic litigation, which tends to focus on national policies or the conduct of individual corporations, international litigation addresses broader systemic failures and cross-border environmental impacts. Consequently, this distinction cements its importance as a mechanism for achieving global climate justice.
III. Key International Judicial Bodies in Climate Litigation
1. International Court of Justice (ICJ)
Although the ICJ has yet to adjudicate a specific climate-related dispute, a significant development occurred in March 2023 when the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution requesting an advisory opinion from the ICJ. Notably, this opinion will clarify the legal obligations of states to prevent climate harm under international law and the consequences faced by states that inflict substantial damage on climate-vulnerable nations. Spearheaded by Vanuatu and backed by over 130 countries, this request has the potential to redefine states’ responsibilities under existing treaties and customary international law. Thus, a favourable advisory opinion could reinforce the legal basis for future climate reparations claims.
2. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)
The ITLOS plays an essential role in resolving ocean-related climate disputes. In December 2022, the Commission of Small Island States (COSIS) sought an advisory opinion on whether greenhouse gas emissions constitute marine pollution under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). If ITLOS rules in favour of this argument, it could legally compel states to implement stricter emissions regulations to safeguard vulnerable marine ecosystems.
3. Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR)
The IACtHR stands on the brink of issuing a landmark advisory opinion concerning states’ climate obligations under the American Convention on Human Rights. Following a joint request by Colombia and Chile in January 2023, this case examines whether insufficient climate action infringes upon fundamental rights, including the rights to life, health, and a healthy environment. If the court rules in favour of the claimants, it could set a powerful precedent for similar claims within other regional human rights systems.
- European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
In a groundbreaking ruling in April 2024 (KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz v. Switzerland), the ECtHR determined that Switzerland’s insufficient climate policies violated the right to life and the right to private life, as enshrined in Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This decision marks the first legally binding condemnation by an international court of a state for its inaction on climate change. As a result, the ruling not only prompts Switzerland to reconsider its climate strategies but also serves as a powerful catalyst that may inspire similar lawsuits across Europe and beyond.
As the landscape of climate change litigation continues to evolve, international courts and tribunals will undoubtedly play prominent roles in shaping global environmental justice and influencing state policies regarding climate obligations.
IV. Legal and Procedural Challenges
As international climate litigation gains prominence, it encounters several significant obstacles:
1. Jurisdictional Limitations
Firstly, many international courts, including the International Court of Justice (ICJ), require state consent to hear contentious cases. Consequently, most climate disputes rely on advisory opinions or human rights mechanisms. While these channels can influence legal standards, they often lack direct enforcement power, which makes meaningful change difficult.
2. Causation and Attribution
Moreover, proving that a specific state’s emissions caused harm in another country presents a significant legal challenge due to the diffuse and cumulative nature of climate change. Although advancements in attribution science help establish connections between emissions and impacts, the legal frameworks often struggle to accommodate this evolving scientific understanding.
3. Weak Enforcement Mechanisms
In addition, even when courts rule against states or corporations, enforcing these rulings remains a challenge. For example, the Paris Agreement relies on voluntary compliance, and international bodies lack strong punitive measures to ensure accountability. This weak enforcement undermines the potential impact of judicial decisions on climate action.
4. Corporate Accountability Gaps
Furthermore, most international tribunals focus primarily on state responsibility, leaving few options for holding multinational corporations accountable for climate-related damages. To address this gap, advocates are pushing for new treaties or amendments that would allow for direct legal action against corporate actors, thereby enhancing accountability for their environmental impacts.
V. The Future of International Climate Litigation
As the impacts of climate change escalate, international litigation is expected to evolve in several key ways:
1. Increased Advisory Opinions
For instance, opinions from the ICJ and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) could pave the way for new legal standards. This shift may encourage more climate-vulnerable nations to seek judicial clarification on the obligations of higher-emitting countries and strengthen their legal positions.
2. Human Rights-Centric Approaches
Additionally, courts are increasingly recognising climate inaction as a violation of human rights. Future cases may target both governments and private entities, utilising frameworks like the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to hold them accountable for their contributions to climate change.
3. Strategic Litigation by Small Island States
Notably, nations such as Vanuatu, Tuvalu, and the Maldives are at the forefront of efforts to hold high-emitting countries accountable through international law. These nations are exploring initiatives, including potential loss and damage claims and climate refugee protections, so as to address the disproportionate impacts they face.
4. Expansion of Legal Theories
Finally, new legal arguments, such as ecocide, which focuses on mass environmental destruction, and intergenerational equity, may gain traction in international courts. These concepts encourage a broader understanding of environmental harm and could inspire innovative legal strategies to address the climate crisis.
VI. Conclusion
In conclusion, international climate litigation represents a transformative shift in global environmental governance. Although challenges related to jurisdiction and enforcement persist, landmark rulings and advisory opinions are actively reshaping the legal landscape. As vulnerable nations and activists increasingly turn to international tribunals, these judicial bodies are poised to play a crucial role in driving systemic climate action and ensuring accountability for both historical and ongoing environmental harm. Through leveraging emerging legal theories and human rights frameworks, the future of climate litigation may secure stronger protections for the planet and its inhabitants and ongoing environmental harm.
Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India
