This article examines how the 2025 Advisory Opinion (AO) of the International Court of Justice on
Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change
places human rights at the centre of States’ climate specific obligations, with particular emphasis on the right to a healthy environment. It argues that, although the Court adopts a restrained and methodologically cautious approach, it nonetheless grounds climate obligations in core human rights treaties and customary human rights law. The article shows that the AO, when read alongside separate judicial views and recent institutional developments, significantly advances the normative consolidation of the right to a healthy environment and strengthens its trajectory toward customary status. At the same time, the AO leaves important gaps, particularly regarding intergenerational equity, the situation of especially affected States, and individuals’ access to remedies, highlighting both the limits of the Court's intervention and the continuing need for a more comprehensive human-rights-based approach to climate obligations.
African States contribute minimally to global greenhouse gas emissions but disproportionately experience the adverse effects of climate change, with profound consequences for human rights, sustainable development, and intergenerational equity. This article contextualises these disparities within the historical dynamics...
Daniel Iglesias-Márquez· Age of Human Rights Journal· 0 citations
Released in 2025, a year unprecedented in terms of the call on international and regional bodies for advisory opinions on obligations of states for climate action, the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change 2025 represents a significant dev...
While the International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion on Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change has already been widely discussed, little attention has yet been paid to the method followed by the Court, which is the subject of this commentary. Indeed, the Court followed a methodological approach a...
Sandrine Maljean-Dubois· Environmental Policy and Law· 0 citations
The issue of States’ compliance with international human rights law (IHRL) is paramount since the norms they espouse are useless unless States put in place measures for compliance with them within their domestic jurisdictions. This article discusses the intersections between compliance with IHRL and democratic governan...
J. Arowosegbe, O. Gbadamosi, M. Nasir· Journal of Public Management...· 0 citations
This article analyzes the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ 2025 advisory opinion on the climate emergency from the perspective of its implications for Canada. The authors identify key legal developments: “climate emergency” as a decisive interpretive element; the peremptory (
jus cogens
) obligation not to g...
Christopher Campbell-Duruflé, Bernard Duhaime· Canadian Yearbook of Interna...· 0 citations
This commentary engages with Harro van Asselt and Tejas Rao's analysis of the implications of the ICJ's Advisory Opinion on Climate Change for fossil fuel‐producing States. The Court affirmed that States are subject to a ‘stringent’ due diligence obligation to prevent harm to the climate system and other parts of the...
Sol Meckievi· Review of European, Comparat...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.