Date: 03/04/2023

Relevance: GS-2: Important International institutions, agencies and fora- their structure, mandate.

Key Phrases: UN General Assembly, International Court of Justice, UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, Paris Agreement, Small Island Developing States, Customary International Law, UN Declaration of Human Rights.

Context:

• The recent resolution sponsored by Vanuatu and adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) asking the International Court of Justice to weigh in on the issue has once again brought the issue of climate change to the forefront of global discussions.

Key Highlights:

• The move reflects the frustration of the international community, especially small island countries, which are facing an existential threat, with the procedures of the global climate agencies, particularly the UNFCCC, which often end up in compromises that delay climate action.
• The advisory jurisdiction permits the ICJ to offer legal guidance to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), the Security Council (SC), and other specialized bodies regarding legal questions.
• Although the ICJ's advisory opinions lack binding force, they carry normative weight and provide guidance on relevant issues of international law.
  • Moreover, the ICJ's advisory opinion on climate change could prove beneficial in domestic climate litigation.

The Global Consensus on Climate Change:

• The Vanuatu-sponsored proposal, which was adopted unanimously by the UNGA, highlights the growing global consensus on the need for urgent action on climate change.
  • The resolution also reflects the frustration of the international community with the procedures of the global climate agencies, particularly the UNFCCC.
• The UNFCCC has been the primary international forum for negotiating global responses to climate change since the 1990s, but its deliberations have often been slow and cumbersome.
  • This has led to delays in implementing the necessary measures to mitigate the impact of climate change.
  • The Vanuatu-sponsored proposal seeks to address this issue by calling on the International Court of Justice to provide clarity on the legal obligations of countries to protect their citizens from climate impacts.
• This move could set the stage for countries to incorporate climate justice into their legal frameworks, similar to the way the UN Declaration of Human Rights has found resonance in statute books across the world.

The Importance of Climate Justice:

• The Vanuatu-sponsored resolution focuses on the issue of climate justice, which is increasingly becoming a major concern in global discussions on climate change.
• Climate justice refers to the fair distribution of the costs and benefits of climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts, taking into account the fact that the impact of climate change is not evenly distributed.
• Developing countries, which have contributed the least to greenhouse gas emissions, are often the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, while developed countries, which have contributed the most to greenhouse gas emissions, are better equipped to deal with the impacts of climate change.
  • The use of the vocabulary of rights and justice has given the Vanuatu-sponsored proposal more traction.
• Climate justice is rooted in the idea that countries that have contributed the most to greenhouse gas emissions bear the greatest responsibility for mitigating climate change and helping vulnerable countries adapt to its impacts.
  • This idea has gained momentum in recent years, with countries asserting their right to reparations after climate emergencies, such as Pakistan after last year's floods.

Holding Countries and Governments Accountable:

• Holding individual countries or governments accountable for their climate inaction poses significant challenges.
  • The issue has been a major stumbling block at several climate meets, and the Paris Agreement, signed in 2015, has a clause specifying that the pact "does not involve or provide a basis for any liability or compensation
  • American support for the UNGA resolution was reportedly reluctant, highlighting the challenges of holding countries and governments accountable for their climate inaction.
• The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice will not be binding, but its pronouncements carry moral weight.
  • It could provide clarity on the legal obligations of countries to protect their citizens from climate impacts, which could pave the way for countries to incorporate climate justice into their legal frameworks.
• However, it will be up to individual countries to take concerted action on climate change and ensure that the countries that have contributed the most to greenhouse gas.

Conclusion:

• The issue of whether countries can be sued under international law for failing to avert climate emergencies is a complex one, and the success of the Vanuatu-sponsored resolution highlights the growing global consensus on the need for urgent action on climate change and the importance of addressing the issue of climate justice.
• The International Court of Justice's advisory opinion could provide clarity on the legal obligations of countries to protect their citizens from climate impacts, but it will be up to individual countries to incorporate climate justice into their legal frameworks and take concerted action on climate change.

Source: The Indian Express.

Mains Question:

Q. To what extent do you agree that involving the International Court of Justice in climate-related processes could make them more justice-oriented? Provide reasons for your answer. (150 words).