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 
28 August 2025
Can Africa Still Drill?
While the ICJ found that any State suffering from climate change can bring charges against others for their contribution to climate change, the opinion does not distinguish between the obligations of developed and developing States (except where treaty law already imposes different obligations). African States and the African Union have continued to support fossil fuel development on the continent. In light of this advisory opinion, what obligations are imposed on developing States, like African States, to protect the climate, particularly regarding the further development of fossil fuel industries? Continue reading >>26 August 2025
Closing the Silences
At COP 30 in Belém, ministers will wrangle over how “sufficient” the new climate-finance goal must be, and whether “phase-down” of coal is a slogan or a legal trigger. In Brussels, the 2040 climate target faces the same test, while in Geneva, the WTO’s fossil-subsidy reform stalls over which tax breaks to cut. Read through a strict consent-only lens, and these are political choices. Read through the ICJ’s frame – science, equity, no-harm, precaution – they become legal ones: finance must be capable of delivering 1.5°C and repairing loss and damage, coal and subsidy policies must be plausibly 1.5°C-compatible, and the burden falls on governments to prove it. Continue reading >>
0
19 August 2025
Is Montevideo Sinking?
Following the ICJ’s opinion, only time will tell whether the Montevideo criteria are themselves “sinking,” and what might replace them. It remains doubtful whether sunken States could be sovereign equals to States with territory, as they would necessarily rely on the goodwill of their host State to cede jurisdiction to some degree. Even though the ICJ’s opinion is a big step forward (especially) for small island States, it cannot, by itself, preserve a State’s full sovereignty once its territory is submerged. Small island States have contributed the least to climate change, yet now face an existential threat. This unfair fate must be prevented. I Continue reading >>
0
19 August 2025
Statehood in the Climate Crisis
In this blog post, we zero in on the part of the ICJ's climate advisory opinion that concerns statehood. Specifically, we analyze the ICJ’s restatement of the presumption of state continuity, examining both what the Court says and doesn’t say, and what the implications could be. We also consider the individual opinions that discuss statehood and add some brief reflections on the applicability of Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (Montevideo Convention) and on State extinction. Our analysis is preliminary, and certainly much ink will be spilled on the ICJ’s remarks going forward. Continue reading >>
0
15 August 2025
When Custom Binds All States
The ICJ affirmed that States have binding customary obligations to prevent significant harm to the climate system and to cooperate in addressing the crisis. Rejecting arguments that climate treaties override these duties, the Court clarified that non-parties remain bound. While acknowledging law’s limits, the ICJ’s opinion provides a powerful legal foundation to guide climate negotiations, litigation, and collective action worldwide. Continue reading >>
0