Once again, the International Court calls for a decisive climate policy

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) ruled on Tuesday that greenhouse gases pose a significant risk to the oceans and that countries have a duty to better protect oceans and coastal areas through climate policies. Once again, an international court decided that global agreements to prevent global warming are not without obligations.

Countries can say they support reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN's scientific climate panel, but they must also act accordingly, the 21 judges at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea unanimously concluded. Countries may have stated in the Paris Climate Agreement (2015) that they want to limit global temperature rise, but they must also work to develop policies that actually bring this goal closer.

The case was brought to court in 2022 by several small island states, led by Antigua and Barbuda, and Tuvalu. They are seriously threatened by climate change and are calling on the international community to take more action to prevent greenhouse gas emissions.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which entered into force in 1994 and has been ratified by 168 countries and the European Union, does not explicitly mention climate change. Therefore, judges first had to determine whether they had the jurisdiction to rule. China, the world's biggest climate polluter, disputed that during a hearing in September. Saudi Arabia, one of the most important oil producers, also felt that the court should not interfere: (climate) legislation is a matter for politicians.

Read also
Tuvalu may disappear into the sea this century, and is already uninhabitable.

Seawater acidification

The judges did not agree. Based on climate science summarized in IPCC reports and officially endorsed by almost every country in the world, they consider greenhouse gases to be a form of pollution. Some carbon dioxide emitted by humans₂It is the most important greenhouse gas, disappears into the ocean and leads to acidification of seawater. Nearly 90% of the temperature rise also ends up in the oceans, causing water expansion and rising sea levels. According to the judges, all this has serious consequences for ecosystems, coastal areas and fish stocks.

According to Article 192 of UNCLOS, states are obligated to protect and preserve the “marine environment” and thus prevent greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible. It is striking that the judges, in line with the demands of small island states, are demanding a maximum temperature increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius. The Paris Climate Agreement sets “well below 2 degrees Celsius” as a hard target and just 1.5 degrees as a target – and many climate scientists now agree that this target is no longer achievable.

precedent

The Hamburg-based court's ruling is not binding. But lawyers expect it to play an important role in future lawsuits. Certainly in combination with other international provisions. For example, the European Court of Human Rights ruled last month that Switzerland must better protect its citizens from the consequences of climate change. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is also scheduled to soon consider inter-American climate obligations, at the request of Colombia and Chile.

Read also
With its ruling in Switzerland, the Human Rights Court sets a crucial precedent in future climate cases

Finally, the International Court of Justice, based in The Hague, will rule at the request of the small island state of Vanuatu. This may take some time, because 91 countries have made their own declaration in this case. A court record showing how seriously countries are dealing with the matter.

(The Law of the Sea Tribunal issued its ruling on Tuesday and not on Monday as stated in a previous version)

To participate




Email the editor