You are here
Home > Article > Climate finance not charity, but obligation, ICJ hears

Climate finance not charity, but obligation, ICJ hears

Developing nations should not bear the brunt of the climate crisis caused by the industrialized world’s historical emissions. This was the resounding message as the Solomon Islands, India, and Iran, among others, presented their cases before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The submissions from three nations—Solomon Islands, India, and Iran—converged on one critical point: climate change is a global crisis requiring collective action. The Solomon Islands highlighted the intrinsic link between climate justice and human rights, urging urgent global efforts to protect vulnerable populations.

At the request of Vanuatu, the UN General Assembly asked the ICJ to issue an advisory opinion on the obligations of UN member states in preventing climate change and ensuring the protection of the environment for present and future generations. While its advisory opinion will not be enforceable, the court will advise on the legal consequences for member states that have caused significant harm, particularly to small island developing states. Hearings are ongoing at the court in The Hague.

India stressed the need for international cooperation based on the principles of equity and the Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDRRC); however, it cautioned against any overreach that could compromise developmental priorities. Iran agreed, asserting that effective climate action depends on the fair treatment of developing nations and the removal of barriers to cooperation.

Solomon Islands: A Cry for Justice

Representatives Attorney General John Muria, Junior and counsel Harj Narulla from the Solomon Islands elaborated on the threats posed by rising sea levels, urging the ICJ to affirm the moral and legal obligations of industrialized nations to support vulnerable states.

“Our people face displacement, loss of livelihoods, and threats to their cultural heritage, yet we have contributed negligibly to global emissions,” said Muria. He called for the court to prioritize the principle of “climate justice,” asserting that nations historically responsible for greenhouse gas emissions bear a greater obligation to mitigate climate impacts and assist affected countries.

The Solomon Islands demanded enhanced financial and technological support for small island and least-developed states. They argued that this assistance is not an act of charity but a legal and ethical necessity rooted in international law.

India Pleads for Equity and Differentiated Responsibilities

India’s representative, Luther Rangreji, said that the complexities of climate change as a global challenge disproportionately affect developing nations. Rangreji highlighted the inherent inequities, noting that developing nations, like India, contribute less to emissions but bear the brunt of climate impacts.

“Developed countries, historically the largest contributors to climate change, have the resources to address it. Yet, they demand that developing nations limit their energy use. This is inequity at its core,” Rangreji said.

India’s submission reinforced the principle of CBDRRC as enshrined in international agreements such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Rangreji said that developing nations’ developmental priorities, including poverty eradication, must not be compromised in the name of climate action.

Legal Frameworks and Unmet Financial Obligations

Both India and the Solomon Islands highlighted the necessity for robust legal frameworks to address climate change. The Solomon Islands referenced previous ICJ cases, such as the Pulp Mills and Nuclear Weapons advisory opinions, to underline states’ obligations to prevent transboundary harm.

India, while advocating for the frameworks established by the UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, and Paris Agreement, cautioned against imposing new obligations. Rangreji emphasized the significance of fulfilling current commitments, specifically the USD 100 billion annual climate finance pledge from developed nations, a promise that provided minimal benefits to developing countries.

“USD 100 billion pledged at the Copenhagen COP in 2009 by developed country parties and the doubling of the contribution to the adaptation fund have not yet been translated into any concrete actions,” Rangreji said.

“Climate finance is not charity; it is an obligation.”

He argued that developing nations can scale up climate actions only if adequately supported.

Furthermore, India provided data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to highlight disparities. Rangreji noted that developed nations, despite comprising only 16 percent of the global population, contributed 57 percent of cumulative emissions between 1850 and 2019. This historical responsibility, India argued, necessitates a differential approach to climate obligations.

Similarly, the Solomon Islands stated that small island nations bear a disproportionate burden of climate impacts. “Justice demands that those who benefited most from industrialization should bear the greater burden of rectifying its consequences,” stated their representative.

Iran Urges Equity and International Cooperation

Sayyid Ali Mousavi, representing the Islamic Republic of Iran, emphasized the principles of equity, CBDRRC, and international cooperation. Mousavi emphasized the significant challenges that developing nations like Iran, despite their limited emissions, face due to climate change.

Mousavi criticized unilateral coercive measures imposed by developed nations, arguing that these measures hinder the transfer of financial support and technology critical for climate mitigation in developing countries. He called on the ICJ to recognize such restrictions as violations of international cooperation principles.

“Developed countries must lead in reducing emissions and supporting developing nations through financial resources, technology transfer, and capacity building,” Mousavi stated, referencing the UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, and Paris Agreement as foundational frameworks.

Iran’s representative stated that the CBDRRC principle is significant, as it differentiates obligations based on historical emissions and current capacities. Mousavi argued that developed nations’ leadership in addressing climate change should include financial contributions, technology transfer, and capacity-building efforts for developing countries.

“Without access to technology and resources, developing countries cannot effectively participate in global climate mitigation efforts,” Mousavi told the court.

He criticized trade policies such as the carbon border adjustment mechanism, describing them as disproportionate measures that unfairly burden developing economies.

Umar Manzoor Shah is a correspondent of Inter Press Service (IPS)

Similar Articles

Leave a Reply

Top