IN Honiara, participants at this week’s Pacific Islands Forum have hailed last July’s International Court of Justice advisory opinion on climate change.
For President of Kiribati Taneti Maamau, “the ICJ advisory opinion is a milestone and a great achievement for the global family – especially those facing the dire consequences of climate change in our part of the world, the Pacific Ocean.”
“The outcome of the ICJ is very fundamental,” Maamau said, “as it helps to clarify the state of our nations and the consequences for small islands, that countries can face. It has provided the avenue which helps us to validate our climate concerns and especially to recognise the threat posed by climate change to our sovereignty, territorial rights and integrity.”
There were celebrations when the ICJ – the world’s highest court in The Hague – issued its ruling last July. But now, there are still steps still to be taken, as the discussion turns to implementation. Climate campaigners must refer the opinion back to the UN General Assembly, introduce its principles into domestic law and institutions, and mobilise Pacific governments and communities to promote the advisory opinion at the next global climate negotiations, to be held in Brazil in November.
For Vanuatu’s climate minister Ralph Regenvanu, “this opinion represents a blueprint for structural change inside our country as well as outside. It’s not about short term measures – it’s about shaping our institutions and our systems to ensure long term accountability. The transformation will take time, but we’re starting now.”
At this week’s Forum meeting, hosted by the Government of the Solomon Islands, action on climate change is a central focus.
At a ceremony on Wednesday night, fifteen of the eighteen Forum members signed a treaty to establish the new Pacific Resilience Facility, a new regional fund that aims to build community preparedness and resilience against the impacts of climate change and the frequent disasters. On the night, the Kingdom of Tonga, which will host the PRF, also formally lodged its ratification of the treaty, with Nauru and other countries to follow.
Young people take the lead
At panels and plenaries throughout the Forum, leaders have highlighted the campaign for an ICJ advisory opinion as a striking example of collective regional diplomacy.
The campaign began with young law students from the University of the South Pacific (USP) law school at the Emalus campus in Port Vila. Inspired by their call for legally binding commitments on climate action, the Vanuatu government led an international campaign that led to a resolution at the UN General Assembly, requesting an advisory opinion from the ICJ on climate change and human rights.
This week in Honiara, leaders acknowledged the vital role played by the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change (PISFCC) and other community networks in carrying the case forward, as well as the crucial role played by Vanuatu Climate Minister Ralph Reganvanu.
Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr thanked Regenvanu “for really being a trailblazer when it comes to climate change” and joked “we refer to him as Minister Ralph because he has the longest title when it comes to us ministers!” (Regenvanu’s full title is Minister for Climate Change, Adaptation, Energy, Environment, Meteorology, Geo-Hazards and Disaster Management).
In March 2023, the UN General Assembly formally asked the ICJ to clarify states’ obligations around climate change and the consequences of breaching these obligations. The court considered states’ obligations under international law, such their duty to protect the climate system, and the legal consequences when they cause significant harm through actions or inaction.
Last year, the ICJ received submissions from nearly 100 governments and international organisations, then held hearings and arguments over two weeks in December 2024. During the case, several industrialised countries and fossil fuel exporting nations – including Germany, Australia, Saudi Arabia and the United States – argued that they had no legal obligations on climate action beyond the voluntary commitments adopted under the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Under the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change, countries lodge national climate plans known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which set out their commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change impacts. But these NDCs are voluntary commitments, and vulnerable states and communities have long fought for legally binding commitments under international law.
When the ICJ issued its advisory opinion in July this year, it unanimously confirmed that international law requires nation states to prevent significant harm to the climate, and the failure to do so can trigger legal responsibility. The world’s highest court ruled that multiple sources of international law impose legal duties on states to prevent transboundary environmental harm, undertake due diligence to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and also adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change.
In an important step, the ICJ also held that customary international law imposes binding obligations on states to take precautionary measures to avoid climate harm, including through the regulation of private actors, such as transnational corporations.
States must regulate private actors’ emissions, with governments required to take appropriate measures to prevent foreseeable harm. This would include actions like fossil fuel production and consumption, the issuing new exploration licenses or providing subsidies to fossil fuel corporations.
Welcoming the decision last July, Secretary General of the Pacific Islands Forum Baron Waqa said “the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion marks a pivotal moment for our region, forging a new legal pathway that strengthens our efforts to safeguard our ocean, our people, and our environment, from the devastating impacts caused by climate change.”
Waqa noted that the ruling “reaffirms the Boe Declaration’s framing of climate change as the Pacific’s single greatest threat, to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of the peoples of the Pacific, and our commitment to progress the implementation of the Paris Agreement.”
He stressed that for Pacific peoples, “climate change is not just an environmental issue, but a matter of international justice, human rights, and intergenerational equity.”
Speaking in Honiara this week, Kiribati President Taneti Maamau said: “The ICJ decision brings more certainty than before. The decision itself sets a very good precedent by establishing a framework for all people and states to be accountable for greenhouse gas emissions and their effect on vulnerable nations like Kiribati – and the rest of us.”
“It will empower Pacific voices by providing a platform for Pacific island countries to assert their rights and interests in the international climate negotiations.”
President Surangel Whipps Jr of Palau also highlighted the importance of the ICJ, in opening the way for litigation to enforce climate obligations.
“Some larger nations have advised us that we shouldn’t be suing or going to court,” Whipps said. “But the reality is that we go to climate change conferences and we keep on talking and talking, but the actions are just not happening.”
“The world has to respect the rule of law,” Whipps said. “Now that we have the ICJ decision, the goal is to change behaviour, to hold people accountable, to hold countries accountable. If you murder somebody, you have to go to jail. But if you eliminate a country – there’s no penalty for that? That’s not right!”
Translation the ICJ ruling into action
While acknowledging the importance of the ICJ advisory opinion, the challenge remains – how to translate it into action.
On Thursday, when Pacific leaders gather at their annual retreat at Noro in Solomon Islands’ Western Province, they will consider a resolution to endorse the ICJ opinion, and seek action from Forum Dialogue Partners.
Vanuatu’s climate minister Regenvanu said: “At the regional level, the ICJ opinion has confirmed that the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is a human right under international law. For the Pacific, this opens the door to the legal recognition of this right, for example through the Pacific Islands Forum.”
“Embedding this right regionally would give our people a stronger shield to protect against climate harm, and another tool to hold harmful conduct accountable,” he said. “The Pacific should use this opinion to advocate for ambitious commitments at COP30, robust loss and damage finance and a rapid end to fossil fuel expansion..”
For Regenvanu, the principles of the ICJ opinion must now be integrated into domestic law and policy, by Gorum members but also their development partners.
“In Vanuatu”, he said, “we’ve already integrated its conclusions into our NDC, which our Council of Ministers approved last week. We’re aligning our National Determined Contribution with the court’s opinion: all licencing, permitting and procurement should pass through an ICJ implementation test to ensure that projects are consistent with what is our duty – to prevent climate change.”
He said the ICJ advisory opinion opens the door for reparations and redress to vulnerable communities: “We need to empower our communities to document the harm they’re suffering, the loss they’ve experienced, to access reparations.”
One important next step is to bring the advisory opinion back to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to be endorsed in a resolution.
“An upcoming UNGA resolution on the ICJ opinion will further acknowledge these obligations internationally”, Regenvanu said. “We are tabling a UNGA resolution, probably next month. We need to fully act together to support this General Assembly resolution, to translate the authority of the advisory opinion into structural reforms and concrete safeguards for our people and our cultures.”