05 November 2025
Visualisation of the Advisory Opinion on Climate by the International Court of Justice
While many commentators continue to add valuable words, this blogpost communicates through pictures. A collaboration between a lawyer and two designers, our data story considers the Court’s reasoning and links its consequences to interrelated information. Continue reading >>
0 
03 November 2025
Toward Structural Climate Reparations?
Legal scholarship on climate reparations has so far focused almost exclusively on financial compensation whereby wealthier nations provide funding to cover the costs of climate-induced disasters in developing countries. Yet, cash transfers alone are insufficient to address the deeper structural barriers that prevent countries in the Global South from mobilizing the resources needed for effective climate mitigation and adaptation. This blog post argues for a shift toward structural reparations that address both the crushing debt burdens and climate vulnerabilities facing Global South countries. Continue reading >>
0
02 November 2025
Looking for an African Perspective on the ICJ’s Climate Advisory Opinion
Despite the fact that Africa, as a continent, has contributed the least to climate change and is already suffering some of the worst of its impacts, with almost no financial support or relief from historical polluters, African concerns, arguments, and solutions got little attention in the ICJ advisory opinion. While Tadi and Sebutinde called on African idioms to articulate their response to the opinion, they fell short of articulating an African perspective on the obligations of States in relation to climate change. Continue reading >>
0
18 September 2025
The ECJ’s Opportunity to Address the EU’s Climate Mitigation Obligations
The pending EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement raises fundamental questions regarding the Union’s climate mitigation obligations under both EU and international law. Members of the European Parliament are considering a request for an opinion from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the agreement’s compatibility with EU law. Such a review is warranted, as the agreement appears incompatible with the EU’s mitigation duties. Continue reading >>
0
16 September 2025
A Right to Defend the Environment
In a remarkable yet underexplored section, the IACtHR establishes a right to defend the environment, along with corresponding duties of States to protect environmental defenders. By recognizing environmental defenders as essential actors in democratic climate governance, the IACtHR’s advisory opinion advances a bold vision of environmental democracy that positions civic engagement as a vital precondition for legitimate and effective climate action. Continue reading >>
0
12 September 2025
From Sidelines to Center Stage
The trilogy of climate advisory opinions from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the International Court of Justice marks a watershed moment not only for climate litigation but also for understanding the evolving role of Conferences of the Parties (COPs) in international law. This post analyses the courts' engagement with COPs and argues that it represents another step in clarifying their institutional role in global governance – one that elevates these treaty bodies from largely diplomatic forums to authoritative interpreters and potentially norm-creators within treaty regimes. Continue reading >>
0
11 September 2025
International Law’s Administrative Law Turn and the Paris Agreement
In the recent Advisory Opinion on States’ Obligations in respect of Climate Change, various remarks by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) lean into an increasingly “administrative” law turn in international law. In this blog post, we investigate this phenomenon by looking at the ways in which States’ preparation, communication, and maintenance of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement are coming to be characterised by requirements or standards with a domestic administrative law tone. Continue reading >>
0
05 September 2025
Epistemic Authority and the Right to Science in AO-32/25
Traditionally, the right to science as occupied a marginal place within the contentious and advisory architecture of the Inter-American system. However, in its Advisory Opinion–AO-32/25, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights changes this framework by shifting the right to science from a peripheral tool of knowledge dissemination to a central axis of disputes over epistemic authority in public policy formation. This repositioning is not merely about expanding the scope of an undervalued right but about redefining its legal status based on the structural transformations imposed by the climate crisis on the normative production forms and institutional recognition of knowledge. Continue reading >>
0
04 September 2025
The Evasion of Historical Responsibility?
The International Court Advisory’s advisory opinion on Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change has been celebrated as marking the start of a “new era of climate reparations.” In my contribution, I want to draw attention to how, even as the ICJ opened the door to climate reparations, it was evasive on the key temporal questions that are central to any future claims about reparations owed by individual countries for their historical greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the advisory opinion avoided addressing how colonial histories continue to shape present day climate injustices and the need to decolonize international law. Continue reading >>
0
03 September 2025
“Doing the Utmost”
The ICJ found that some norms, previously thought not binding and falling under the unfettered discretion of States (e.g. the content of NDCs) are in fact binding obligations of conduct based on a due diligence standard, and their breach gives rise to state responsibility. In this blog post, I address some pertinent issues regarding due diligence as addressed by the ICJ, as well as ITLOS and the IACtHR. In particular, I focus on the relationship between obligations of result and obligations of conduct, the nature of due diligence, factors to determine its content, and the legal consequences of not acting with the required diligence. Continue reading >>
0