On Wednesday , the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted a "historic" resolution asking the International Court of Justice to express its opinion on the "duties" of countries in the field of combating climate warming , after a years-long struggle led by Vanuatu and a youth initiative in the Pacific.

Cheers rang out to welcome the adoption of the resolution, which was seen as a victory that climate justice advocates are counting on to increase pressure on polluting countries that are not doing enough to address the emergency caused by climate change.

With the adoption of this decision unanimously by more than 130 countries, the International Court of Justice will have to give its opinion on the "duties of states" to protect the climate system "for present and future generations" because of climate warming, which constitutes an "unprecedented challenge with repercussions for civilization" as a whole.

"Together, you are writing history," UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said from the rostrum of the General Assembly, considering that even if the decision to be issued by the international tribunal is non-binding, it could help the leaders of the planet to "take the most courageous and most powerful climate measures they have ever taken." The world desperately needs it."

"It is a clear and powerful message (...) On this day, the peoples of the United Nations (...) have decided to put aside their differences and work together to address the major challenge of our time: climate change ".

"It's a victory for people and communities around the world who are on the front lines of the climate crisis," said Pacific Islands Climate Action Network Regional Policy Coordinator Lavitanalaghi Ciro.


The Vanuatu government launched this "historic initiative" in 2021 after a campaign initiated by university students in Fiji two years earlier.

A week ago, experts at the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that from 2030-2035, warming will reach a threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to the pre-industrial era.

The Paris climate agreement stipulated that global warming should be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Experts considered this a dangerous reminder of the urgent need to move radically during the current decade to ensure a "viable future" for humanity.

And if the Paris Agreement provides for non-binding national commitments for countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the resolution approved by the General Assembly provides for other mechanisms such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Although the opinions of the International Court of Justice are not binding, they carry considerable legal and moral weight and are taken into account by national courts.

Vanuatu and the parties supporting it hope that the Court's opinion, expected within two years, will prompt governments to accelerate their action on their own initiative or through prosecutions targeting them around the world.

"This will be an important tool for holding states accountable," Harjit Singh of NGO Climate Action Network told AFP, welcoming in advance "one of the biggest achievements of climate diplomacy in recent times."
However, his enthusiasm is not shared by everyone.

"I don't see what a useful opinion the court can issue. On the other hand, I imagine scenarios in which this effort backfires," Benoit Meyer, an expert in international law at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, told AFP. He talked about the possibility of a "catastrophic scenario" in which the court would issue a "clear and specific opinion, but contrary to the wishes of the applicants."

No country objected to the resolution, which was adopted unanimously, knowing that China and the United States, the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gases, are not among its transmitters.

"We have serious concerns that this process would complicate our collective efforts and not bring us closer to achieving these common goals," said US Representative Nicholas Hill, stressing that he preferred diplomacy to a "judicial path" that would exacerbate differences.

During the Paris climate agreement negotiations, the Americans obtained a clause stating that the agreement "cannot form the basis of any liability or compensation."

This issue constitutes a fundamental point in the discussion about “loss and damage” and its financing, and it is a basic demand for the poorest countries, which bear the least amount of responsibility in this.

The General Assembly resolution refers to the "actions" of countries responsible for warming and their "duties" to the small island states as well as to present and future generations.
The adoption of the resolution was a very moving moment for the young people in the Pacific who are behind the initiative.
"This initiative was an opportunity to do something bigger than us, bigger than our concerns and important for future generations," said Cynthia Honyohe, who heads the nongovernmental organization Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change.
"I want to be able to show a picture of my island to my child one day," said the young woman, who is from the Solomon Islands.