The International Court of Justice at the Hague has ruled that governments should be legally responsible for the impacts of their actions on the environment, including the marine environment, and in exacerbating climate change.
The court specifically addressed the use and impacts of fossil fuels, saying, “Failure of a State to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from GHG emissions–including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies–may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that State.”
The court also specifically addressed harms to the marine environment, saying that States parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea “have an obligation to adopt measures to protect and preserve the marine environment, including from the adverse effects of climate change and to co-operate in good faith. sea water and reduction of amenities.”
“Considering the seriousness of the threat posed by climate change and in view of the high
risks of serious and irreversible harm to the marine environment from anthropogenic GHG emissions,” the court said, “the standard of due diligence to be applied when complying with the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment is stringent…. The standard of due diligence has to be ‘more severe for the riskier activities’… The Court agrees that Article 192 (of UNCLOS) therefore requires States parties to take measures
‘as far-reaching and efficacious as possible’ to protect and preserve the marine environment and to prevent or reduce the deleterious effects of climate change and ocean acidification on the marine environment.”
The court also addressed sea level rise. Many islands face an existential threat–they could be completely submerged in the not-too-distant future as a result of other countries’ use of fossil fuels.
“The Court has already emphasized that climate change is a common concern of humankind, one of the adverse effects of which is sea level rise,” their response said. ” In the Court’s view, sea level rise poses challenges in several respects, including of an economic, social, cultural and humanitarian character. It thus finds that the duty to co-operate assumes particular significance in this context, requiring States to take, in co-operation with one another, appropriate measures to address the adverse effects of this serious phenomenon. Such a duty of co-operation is founded on the recognition of the interdependence of States and the ensuing need for solidarity among peoples…. In this regard, co-operation in addressing sea level rise is not a matter of choice for States but a legal obligation.”
In addition to saying governments are legally responsible for the GHG emissions, the court said “States have a duty to prevent significant harm to the environment by acting with due diligence and to use all means at their disposal to prevent activities carried out within their jurisdiction or control from causing significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment.”
The legal consequences resulting from the commission of an internationally wrongful act may include the
obligations of:
(a) cessation of the wrongful actions or omissions, if they are continuing;
(b) providing assurances and guarantees of non-repetition of wrongful actions or omissions, if circumstances so require; and
(c) full reparation to injured States in the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction, provided that the general conditions of the law of State responsibility are met, including that a sufficiently direct and certain causal nexus can be shown between the wrongful act and injury.
The court is the prinicipal judicial organ of the United Nations. The decision is not binding but could provide support for future lawsuits and actions.
