The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is at the center of a major international legal discussion on climate change, hearing from various global entities on a pivotal question. This court, serving as the main judicial body of the United Nations, is evaluating submissions to determine the legal responsibilities of nations in combating climate change.
Currently, the ICJ is listening to submissions from States, NGOs and international organisations, following a request for an advisory opinion about States’ legal obligations concerning climate change.
The resulting advisory opinion could significantly impact the energy industry, as detailed below.
What Prompted the ICJ’s Climate Change Hearings?
In 2021, grassroots climate advocacy groups, along with small island nations that see climate change as an existential threat, pushed for stringent legal mechanisms to hold nations responsible for climate action. This movement led to a call for the United Nations to enhance its climate change efforts.
In response, in March 2023, the United Nations General Assembly asked the ICJ to deliver an advisory opinion on the legal duties of States regarding climate change.
To date, ninety-one nations have submitted written comments to the ICJ. Several NGOs and international bodies, including OPEC and the European Union, are also participating. The ICJ is conducting oral hearings from December 2 to December 13, 2024, before releasing its opinion, anticipated in 2025.
What Are the Key Questions Before the ICJ?
The ICJ is tasked with clarifying States’ legal obligations under international law concerning climate change. Specifically, it will address two primary questions:
First, do States have obligations under international law to protect the climate and prevent environmental damage from greenhouse gas emissions? Such obligations could stem from existing international agreements, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Paris Agreement, or customary international law.
Second, if such obligations exist, what are the legal repercussions for States that have contributed to climate harm?
The ICJ will explore whether obligations, potentially including reparations, are owed to nations and individuals impacted by climate change.
Implications for the Energy Sector
Though the ICJ’s advisory opinion is not legally binding for the United Nations General Assembly or States, it is expected to carry considerable moral and authoritative influence.
If the ICJ determines that States are required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, several consequences could ensue:
- Countries may revise their energy policies, imposing stricter environmental regulations on the energy sector, especially fossil fuel companies, and boosting renewable energy initiatives.
- Emitting nations might face legal challenges domestically for inadequate climate action. Climate advocates could leverage the ICJ opinion to argue that States have failed to meet international legal obligations.
- If the ICJ concludes that emitting nations must compensate victims of climate change, States may hold the energy industry accountable for environmental damages through legislation, legal action, or compensation schemes.
- This could lead to an increase in climate-related lawsuits against companies across various legal systems.
Simultaneously, nations must carefully balance efforts to cut emissions and shift towards renewable energy while honoring existing commitments to the energy sector under trade and investment agreements.
Conclusion
Once issued, the ICJ’s advisory opinion is set to have a substantial impact on the energy sector, mediated by States and climate advocates alike.
Energy firms should prepare for increased regulatory measures and legal challenges across different jurisdictions, making it crucial to stay informed on these developments.
Original Story at www.jdsupra.com