World’s first climate justice case: Small Island nations seek accountability for high-emission countries

World's first climate justice case: Small Island nations seek accountability for high-emission countries

Small island nations adversely afflicted by the climate issue will pursue the world’s first climate justice case against high-emission countries in a historic legal hearing slated for September 11th in Germany’s Hamburg.

What is the first Climate Justice case in the world about?

Under the auspices of the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (Cosis), countries such as the Bahamas, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Antigua and Barbuda will begin pursuing the case in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) to determine whether greenhouse gas emissions absorbed by the marine environment should be classified as pollution.

The ocean plays a key role in climate change mitigation, absorbing 25% of carbon dioxide emissions, trapping 90% of accompanying heat, and generating 50% of the world’s oxygen. The matter will be heard by the ITLOS for two days.

International Climate Justice Laws

Countries are required to prevent, limit, and control marine pollution under the binding United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. If Cosis’s case is successful, these duties could be expanded to encompass carbon emission reductions and the conservation of marine habitats already affected by CO2 pollution.

Tuvalu’s Prime Minister, Kausea Natano, emphasized the importance of immediate action, citing rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and degrading marine ecosystems as a result of climate change. According to estimates, half of Tuvalu’s capital, Funafuti, might be flooded by 2050.

Despite the legally binding Pris Agreement’s goal of keeping global temperature rise to less than 2 degrees Celsius, it allows countries to determine their own emission reduction programs.

So, what’s the bottom line?

In this case, significant polluters are being held accountable in an international court of law. As a result, it remains relevant due to the suit’s unusual character, emphasizing the urgent need to address climate change as it threatens to make some states uninhabitable and submerge others under rising seas.

Exit mobile version