A significant ruling from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has sparked renewed hope among climate activists, including Vanuatu’s 16-year-old advocate, Vepaiamele Trief. The ICJ’s advisory opinion, issued recently, emphasizes the responsibility of nations to mitigate climate change and address the damages caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Trief, who has witnessed the devastating effects of climate change in her home community on the island of Pele, expressed her excitement over the ruling, stating it carries profound implications for climate justice and future generations.
Trief’s community has been significantly impacted by rising sea levels, which have submerged graves and eroded coastlines. She described a “sunken graveyard” where villagers’ resting places are now underwater, a stark reminder of the immediate challenges facing her people. “We still see broken schools and homes, essential facilities like health centres and clinics,” Trief told SBS News. “It’s very sad to see.”
In 2023, Trief was part of a delegation that represented Vanuatu at the ICJ, where they argued for accountability from high-emission countries regarding climate change. The recent ruling aligns with this movement, reinforcing the notion that all states have an obligation to limit carbon emissions and strive to maintain a global temperature increase of no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. “It was amazing — a very emotional moment for all my friends and family,” she added.
Landmark Ruling and Its Implications
The ICJ’s decision follows a recent ruling by the Australian Federal Court, which declared that the government does not have a duty of care to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change impacts. This contrast has raised concerns among activists and experts alike, who argue that the ICJ’s non-binding opinion opens pathways for accountability. According to Siobhan McDonnell, an associate professor at the Australian National University and a climate change negotiator, the ruling could reset international law in this area. “This is an incredible historic opinion,” she noted, underscoring its potential impact on future climate litigation.
The ruling acknowledges that states bear an international obligation to mitigate the impacts of carbon emissions, including limiting fossil fuel production and consumption. McDonnell indicated that failure to do so could result in legal consequences. The advisory opinion also highlights states’ obligations under international human rights law, including ensuring access to life, health, and a safe environment.
According to Aidan Craney, a lecturer at La Trobe University, this ruling provides the largest body of evidence the court has ever considered regarding climate change. “The court supported the consensus from scientists: climate change is real, and it is driven by human actions,” he stated.
Australia’s Future in Climate Accountability
The ICJ’s opinion has immediate significance for Australia, particularly concerning its climate commitments. McDonnell pointed out that there is considerable debate about whether Australia is meeting its obligations under the Paris Agreement, especially regarding its targets for net-zero emissions by 2050 and its updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) due in 2024. “The whole of the Pacific is waiting to see what Australia is going to submit in terms of a 1.5 degree pathway,” she said.
The ruling’s implications extend to Australia’s fossil fuel policies, which have been a point of contention. The ICJ’s advisory suggests that granting exploration licenses and providing subsidies for fossil fuel production may constitute a breach of international obligations, potentially opening avenues for reparations from high-emission countries like Australia to those that are less responsible for climate change. Craney remarked, “Legal avenues have now been opened for reparations payments.”
An Australian government spokesperson stated that the country would “carefully consider the court’s opinion.” They acknowledged the significant impact of climate change on the region and expressed pride in participating in the Vanuatu-led ICJ initiative.
As global awareness of climate issues grows, Trief emphasized the urgent need for action. “While many actions taken now may not have impacts on the environment, they will have very negative impacts in the future,” she cautioned. “It’s really important that their actions reflect their empathy for our smaller developing states in the Pacific.”
The ICJ ruling represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing fight for climate justice, as communities like Trief’s continue to bear the brunt of climate change. As more countries and activists rally for accountability, the impact of this advisory opinion may resonate far beyond the courtroom, shaping the future of climate policy and international cooperation.
