In what is described as “a pivotal moment for climate justice” by activists, the International Court of Justice from December 2-13 will hear oral testimonies of the hundreds of people from all over the world as it considers two fundamental questions: what obligations do states have under international law to protect the climate system and what legal consequences should they face if they cause significant harm through their actions or inactions.

This is the largest case ever before the International Court of Justice, with record numbers of submitted written statements and comments and 110 states and intergovernmental organisations scheduled to make oral presentations.

Advertisement

The proceedings at the Peace Palace in The Hague had been initiated by the request from the Pacific island of Vanuatu to the United Nations General Assembly for an advisory opinion on the “Obligation of States” in respect to climate change.

Vanuatu, which faces several extreme climate events year after year, contributes only 0.02% of global greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. Yet like other small nations and Pacific island states, it suffers disproportionately from climate impacts.

“This case addresses the ongoing violation of fundamental legal norms, including human rights, through the destruction of Earth’s climate system,” said Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, the legal counsel for Vanuatu’s case, and an international lawyer at Blue Ocean Law, at an advance press briefing on the issue. “The damage being inflicted represents an unlawful assault on the very foundations of life itself.”

These proceedings have special significance on several counts, one being the failure of the recently concluded climate summit at Baku to agree on a substantive and meaningful finance agreement to address the crisis and a complete lack of initiative and ambition in the reduction of fossil fuels.

Advertisement

The proceedings at the Peace Palace will be opened by testimonies from Vanuatu, jointly with the Melanesian Spearhead Group. The court, presided over by its president, Nawaf Salam, will hear detailed arguments from a diverse collation of voices from small island nations to major economies, from the African Union to the European Union, from the Organization of African Caribbean and Pacific States, to the World Health Organization, and even the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.

The Asian region is also well represented with the states of India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Indonesia, Nepal, Sri Lanka set to make testimonies in the second week of the hearings.

This landmark legal action takes place in the wake of the continuing inertia after the Paris Agreement seven years ago adopted by 196 parties to safeguard the planet. As Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu’s special envoy for climate change said, peoples’ resilience was not enough to change the situation – it is time the International Court of Justice sets clear responsibilities for the world.

Advertisement

Vulnerable nations are perturbed by the lack of concrete progress in the multilateral climate change meetings every year in lowering emissions or slowing down the destructive impacts of climate change, Regenvanu said.

Despite repeated demands to the world’s leaders and polluters to act decisively on climate change, climate summits have failed to deliver. Vanuatu leaders cited the October 2024 report from the United Nations Environmental Programme, which stated that global greenhouse gas emissions continued to increase in 2023.

The G20 countries (excluding the African Union) were responsible for 77% of all emissions. By comparison, the 47 least developed countries combined were responsible for just 3%.

Advertisement

The advisory request to the International Court of Justice was preceded by a strong grassroots movement five years ago for climate justice. Over 1,700 civil society organisations globally worked to draft a legal question that focused on intergenerational justice as well.

According to the Vanuatu Climate Diplomacy Program, this case originally came about through a successful global campaign spurred by the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, who sought to “bring the world’s biggest problem – climate change – before the world’s highest court”.

Vishal Prashad, director at Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, spoke of the “seemingly endless cycle of rebuilding after superstorms, hurricanes, and floods that decimate entire villages, communities, communities and pile on the burden of debt”.

Advertisement

“We are simply tired of watching climate change take more from our islands,” he said. “By going to the ICJ, we embarked on a voyage to correct these injustices and ensure that the existing mechanisms and systems that are meant to protect our climate and our people get a much-needed course-correction in this critical decade of action.”

Oral testimonies have the power to humanise the climate crisis. An example of this are the testimonies of the Chagos islanders in the International Court of Justice demanding that the United Kingdom restore the Indian Ocean territory to Mauritius, said Joie Chowdhury, Senior Attorney, Center for International Environmental Law.

On October 3, the United Kingdom finally agreed to hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, ending negotiations that began after an International Court of Justice advisory opinion in 2019, which recognised Mauritian claims of sovereignty. Testimonies of residents were crucial in helping the court reach its conclusion.

Advertisement

Similarly, this fortnight’s hearings will serve as a reminder that the climate crisis is about people and it will put people and ecosystems back in the centre of the conversation as it did in the Chagos Islands case. International Court of Justice advisories are important interpretations of international law and it will have ripple effects, Chowdhury said.

The court’s final advisory is expected to take one and a half to two years, but the recent opinion in the case of Chagos Islands has set a precedent for the applicability and assertion of moral authority of such advisories.

“An ambitious court opinion could provide a vital compass to navigate a safe and just future for our communities by holding polluters accountable,” Chowdhury said. “For too long, major polluters have denied responsibility, evaded accountability, and weakened existing legal obligations regarding climate change. It is time to break this cycle of harm and inaction, offering the legal clarity needed to redress past wrongs and guide future climate cases and action.”

Meena Menon is an independent journalist, author and visiting fellow at the Leeds Arts and Humanities Research Institute (LAHRI), University of Leeds, UK.