The U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution this week that asks the world’s top court to weigh in on a high-stakes question: Can countries be sued under international law for failing to address the climate crisis? If the International Court of Justice answers “yes,” then super-polluting countries — like the United States and China — could be subjected to a spate of new, potentially viable legal claims, writes POLITICO’s E&E News reporter Sara Schonhardt. Both the U.S. and China declined to support the petition. And U.S. courts have historically given little deference to international decisions. The resolution, which passed without opposition Wednesday, was brought by the small disaster-prone Pacific island of Vanuatu, which was recently slammed by two back-to-back cyclones. What the resolution does: The resolution asks the International Court of Justice, based in The Hague, to determine whether governments are legally obligated to protect people from climate change-fueled hazards and, if so, what legal consequences nations should face for failing to do so. While an advisory opinion from the court would not be binding, the court has the power to clarify what any international law — not just climate or environmental ones — says with regard to climate change. That means, depending on what the court says, countries could be legally required to reduce planet-warming pollution under a suite of international doctrines (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Already, many countries are seeing a growing number of climate lawsuits that draw on human rights or international law. The court’s guidance could lead to even more. Although the United Nations adopted the resolution, there is no guarantee that the International Court of Justice, its main judicial body, will issue a sweeping opinion. It could say countries have no obligation to address climate change. But some legal analysts told Sara there’s a good chance the court takes a stronger position. Sitting this one out: The Biden administration has said that addressing climate change is a top priority for the United States. But it believes diplomacy, not an international judicial process, is the best way to tackle the crisis. Earlier this month, climate envoy John Kerry said on a press call that the United States had concerns about the resolution’s process and that Vanuatu was “jumping ahead” by going to the International Court of Justice. Still, more than 120 countries sided with Vanuatu and supported the resolution. The high court is expected to make a decision in the next one to two years.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment