Search
Generic filters

Supported by:

30 July 2025

What the Court Didn’t Say

The aim of this blog post is not to summarise the ICJ’s opinion or assess its overall relevance for international law. Instead, it draws attention to some of the issues that the ICJ did not address, or where it might have gone further, by providing more depth, precision, and guidance. By focusing on what the ICJ did not say, we can gain a better understanding of how it navigates its institutional constraints, political sensitivities, and the evolving terrain of international climate litigation. Continue reading >>
0
30 July 2025

A Right Foundational to Humanity’s Existence

For the second time in a month, one of the world’s highest judicial authorities has issued an advisory opinion on the climate crisis that highlights the importance of the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. Echoing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its Advisory Opinion 32/25, on July 23, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) unanimously held that this right constitutes a binding norm of international law. Continue reading >>
0
27 July 2025

International Rulings and the UK–Mauritius Chagos Agreement

On 22 May 2025, following negotiations that began in November 2022 and a joint statement of 3 October 2024 (to learn more, see Sebastian von Massow), the United Kingdom and Mauritius concluded an Agreement, stating that “Mauritius is sovereign over the Chagos Archipelago in its entirety, including Diego Garcia” (Article 1). The Chagos Agreement is not only a diplomatic achievement, but also a “contractual transposition” of the decisions of international courts and tribunals. Continue reading >>
0
15 June 2025

“Almost Genocide”

Genocidal intent does not necessarily pop, prefabricated, out of the perpetrator’s state’s head. It emerges – gradually, often unevenly – as a product of action, omission, emotion, and political opportunity. A war that once had legal justification as defence can thus harden into something else: the destruction of a group as such. This is as true in the specific conditions of Gaza, as it is as a matter of principle. Continue reading >>
0
06 June 2025

Migrant “Instrumentalisation” before the ICJ

On 19 May, Lithuania introduced proceedings against Belarus before the International Court of Justice for the alleged smuggling of migrants. Lithuania claims that Belarus violated provisions of the Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, which supplements the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. This blog will detail several difficulties with Lithuania’s argument which seeks to collapse key differences between migrant smuggling and the practice of migrant “instrumentalisation”. Continue reading >>
0
04 June 2025
,

Genocide in Gaza?

“Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.” This was the claim raised by South Africa before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague just two and a half months after Hamas' large-scale terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. South Africa alleges that Israel's military counteroffensive is not (primarily) directed against Hamas, but rather aims to destroy the group of Palestinians in Gaza as such. This accusation carries significant political and legal weight. However, proving the necessary intent to destroy is difficult; it should not be accepted lightly. At any rate, as Israel's warfare continues and becomes increasingly brutal, the evidence for genocide is mounting. Continue reading >>
11 April 2025
,

“Those with the Guns Are the Last to Starve”

Five Questions to Tom Dannenbaum Continue reading >>
0
14 February 2025

Rethinking Remembrance

Can commemorative practices such as memorials, museums, and national remembrance days effectively transform attitudes and behaviours to deter violence? Despite the proliferation of memorialisation practices globally, their tangible impact on reducing violence or fostering reconciliation and healing is often assumed rather than rigorously demonstrated. Continue reading >>
0
30 December 2024
,

From Objectives to Obligations

On December 13, 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concluded the hearings of the advisory proceedings on State obligations in respect of Climate Change. On the last day of the hearings, judges posed four questions to participants to be answered within a one-week timeframe. The Judges enquired about State obligations in relation to fossil fuels; the interpretation of Article 4 of the Paris Agreement; the content of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment; and the significance of declarations made by some States on becoming parties to the UN climate treaties. This blog post will provide a brief exploration of the first two questions and issues raised.  Continue reading >>
0
07 December 2024
, , ,

„Das IGH-Gutachten könnte die globale Klimagovernance grundlegend ändern.“

Fünf Fragen an Tejas Rao, Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Markus Gehring Continue reading >>
0
Go to Top