El-Seidi Law Firm
Environmental Articles
(The Court's Largest Judicial Act Supporting Climate Justice)
Ahmed ELseidi
Public Interest environmental lawyer & Head of the board Egyptian foundation for Environmental Rights - EFER
August 2025
The courtroom of the International Court of Justice in The Hague witnessed a historic event on July 23, 2025, as the Court issued its long-awaited Advisory Opinion on Climate Justice. This Opinion, which some describe as one of the largest judicial acts ever undertaken by the ICJ in terms of the number of parties, memorials, and oral pleadings submitted, began its first steps with a request from the United Nations General Assembly. Following a unanimous resolution on March 29, 2023, the UNGA requested this Advisory Opinion from the ICJ regarding states' obligations in relation to climate change. Subsequently, the Court set a deadline for the submission of written memorials and comments from states, international organizations, and global civil society. The Court received an impressive 91 written memorials and 62 comments, a number considered among the highest ever submitted to the ICJ.
In addition, the Court heard 96 oral pleadings from states and 11 oral pleadings from international organizations. These proceedings concluded in December 2024. After a thorough discussion and review of the submissions, the Court decided to issue its Advisory Opinion on July 23, 2025. This Opinion was driven by the escalating impacts of climate change, which disproportionately affect the Global South and vulnerable, marginalized groups that are often most exposed to these devastating consequences. Despite the minimal contribution of the Global South to greenhouse gas emissions—in stark contrast to the historical responsibility of the Global North—the former continues to bear the brunt of climate change and lacks the resilience to withstand this crisis. This is where the importance of climate justice becomes clear, as it calls for fairness in the climate response to protect the most vulnerable groups and ensure their participation in shaping and implementing solutions. A justice founded on respect for human rights is the only way to protect nature from past human-induced degradation.
While the concept of climate justice has long been a focal point of extensive discussions in legal, environmental, and civil society circles, this Advisory Opinion from the ICJ grants it, for the first time, clear international legal legitimacy from the highest judicial body in the world.
Key Findings of the Advisory Opinion
The Advisory Opinion addressed several key themes, providing crucial legal interpretations and affirmations. We believe the most important of these is the explicit and clear confirmation of the direct link between climate change and human rights. The Court connected the impacts of climate change—such as rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and desertification—with the resulting direct violations of numerous internationally recognized human rights.
The Right to Life: The Opinion emphasized that the right to life, particularly for residents of areas vulnerable to climate disasters, is directly affected by climate change. Although the Opinion did not explicitly address the role of armed conflicts (such as the aggression by the Israeli occupation of Gaza and Lebanon) in this context, it is possible to build on the oral pleadings submitted by the State of Palestine. Palestine's submission focused on the responsibility of states for greenhouse gas emissions resulting from armed conflicts and military activities, including occupation. This opens a legal avenue to interpret the Advisory Opinion as including environmental damage from armed conflicts under the umbrella of human rights violations.
The Right to Health: Due to the link between certain diseases and changing temperatures, air pollution, and a lack of clean water.
The Right to Food and Water: Resulting from the impact of climate change on agriculture and traditional water sources.
The Right to Housing.
The Right to Self-Determination: Specifically for communities at risk of losing their land and culture.
Another key aspect of the Opinion is its renewed emphasis on states' obligations toward climate justice. The Court stressed that states are not only obligated to reduce emissions (mitigation) and adapt to impacts (adaptation), but also have other legal obligations to ensure that their climate actions and policies are consistent with the principles of human rights and justice. The Opinion further clarified that climate actions must include:
Prioritizing Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups: States must prioritize the protection of the rights of the most vulnerable groups, as they are disproportionately affected by climate change.
Comprehensive and Effective Community Participation: States must ensure the participation of all affected communities in all stages of climate policy and action formulation and implementation.
Access to Climate Information: Guaranteeing the right of individuals and communities to access information related to climate and its impacts.
Access to Justice: States must ensure that individuals and communities harmed by climate change can access the judiciary and use appropriate legal tools to obtain effective remedies and reparations for human rights violations caused by climate policies or practices.
Additionally, the Court affirmed the principle of "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities," stating that countries with a greater historical contribution to greenhouse gas emissions bear a greater responsibility in mitigation efforts and are obligated to provide support to developing nations. This includes increasing climate finance and facilitating technology transfer. The Court also provided a detailed interpretation of the Paris Agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change from a human rights and justice perspective. It urged states to implement and apply the commitments made in these agreements, such as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and emphasized the necessity of aligning climate policies and laws with human rights.
Finally, the Opinion addressed Transboundary Responsibility, indicating that states may be held responsible for climate damage caused by their emissions in other countries, especially if these emissions lead to human rights violations there. This aspect opens the door for potential cross-border climate litigation and supports current international efforts in this area.
The Importance and Potential Implications of the Opinion
Supporting Climate Justice: The Advisory Opinion is a fundamental pillar for the concept of climate justice, especially given the disregard by some major nations (the Global North) despite its explicit mention in the preamble of the Paris Agreement. The Opinion provides a significant legal precedent for interpreting the Paris Agreement in a way that ensures future climate policies are more consistent with climate justice principles. We believe this Opinion will serve as a powerful legal foundation for policymakers and legislators, enabling them to tackle the climate crisis with a focus on climate justice and human rights. Moreover, it is a crucial legal reference for environmental civil society organizations and climate activists, supporting their participation in shaping environmental and climate policies.
Supporting the Right to a Healthy Environment: Although the UN recognized the right to a healthy environment as a human right in 2022, and this right exists in the constitutions of many countries, this recognition alone is insufficient. Environmental and human rights organizations argue that the real challenge lies in translating this recognition into effective policies and laws. The ICJ's Advisory Opinion takes a practical step in this direction by affirming that "a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of many human rights." Based on this affirmation, the Court concluded that states are obligated to protect the environment from climate change emissions to safeguard the rights of present and future generations. This explicit link between climate protection and human rights makes the Opinion a historic event of paramount importance.
The Legal Value of the Advisory Opinion: While not legally binding, the Opinion's legal value is immense. The legal analysis and interpretation it provides serve as a crucial and inspirational reference for judges at both national and international levels in applying and interpreting the provisions of international environmental and climate agreements. The Opinion simplifies the task of the judiciary in interpreting legal texts and supports the evolution of environmental and climate litigation by providing a solid legal foundation. The participation of some states in shaping this Opinion or presenting their views to the Court serves as an implicit endorsement of its contents, which further enhances its strength and influence. For example, the memorial and oral pleading submitted by the Egyptian government expressed a supportive stance on climate justice, aligning with the position of other Global South nations affected by climate change. It focused on the historical responsibility of the Global North, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, compensation for loss and damage, and the link between climate change and fundamental human rights, including the right to life, health, a healthy environment, and development. Without a doubt, all these memorials and oral pleadings reflect the state's vision for climate justice, a vision that helps national judges follow the same path and build upon this in environmental and climate litigation.
The Role of Climate Litigation in Closing the Climate Ambition Gap: The UN's climate litigation report, which provides an update on climate lawsuits worldwide, affirmed that global ambition remains insufficient to address the climate crisis. Despite improvements in mitigation and adaptation efforts in many countries and the increase in corporate commitments to "net-zero emissions," the international community is still far from achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement. In this context, the role of advisory opinions from international courts is to bolster climate litigation efforts. The Opinion provides a clear legal framework that can be relied upon by local and international courts, thereby helping to pressure governments and corporations to increase their ambition and fulfill their climate commitments, and thus bridge the gap between declared goals and actual reality.
The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Advisory Opinion: The request to the African Court emphasizes that African states are the most affected by climate disasters despite their minimal contribution to global emissions. It highlights the devastating impacts of climate change on human rights on the continent, citing real-world examples such as water scarcity in North Africa, which threatens security and stability, and heatwaves and droughts affecting food security in West Africa. The request also raises sensitive issues concerning the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, especially regarding "carbon projects" that may violate their fundamental rights and lead to land disputes. We believe that the Advisory Opinion from the ICJ strengthens the chances of the African Court accepting and issuing its own advisory opinion, which is still under consideration. What distinguishes the African request is that it is the first of its kind in the history of climate cases to be submitted by civil society organizations, not states, which underscores the pivotal role of these organizations in advancing climate justice.
Supporting Climate Justice: The Advisory Opinion is a fundamental pillar for the concept of climate justice, especially given the disregard by some major nations (the Global North) despite its explicit mention in the preamble of the Paris Agreement. The Opinion provides a significant legal precedent for interpreting the Paris Agreement in a way that ensures future climate policies are more consistent with climate justice principles. We believe this Opinion will serve as a powerful legal foundation for policymakers and legislators, enabling them to tackle the climate crisis with a focus on climate justice and human rights. Moreover, it is a crucial legal reference for environmental civil society organizations and climate activists, supporting their participation in shaping environmental and climate policies.
Supporting the Right to a Healthy Environment: Although the UN recognized the right to a healthy environment as a human right in 2022, and this right exists in the constitutions of many countries, this recognition alone is insufficient. Environmental and human rights organizations argue that the real challenge lies in translating this recognition into effective policies and laws. The ICJ's Advisory Opinion takes a practical step in this direction by affirming that "a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of many human rights." Based on this affirmation, the Court concluded that states are obligated to protect the environment from climate change emissions to safeguard the rights of present and future generations. This explicit link between climate protection and human rights makes the Opinion a historic event of paramount importance.
The Legal Value of the Advisory Opinion: While not legally binding, the Opinion's legal value is immense. The legal analysis and interpretation it provides serve as a crucial and inspirational reference for judges at both national and international levels in applying and interpreting the provisions of international environmental and climate agreements. The Opinion simplifies the task of the judiciary in interpreting legal texts and supports the evolution of environmental and climate litigation by providing a solid legal foundation. The participation of some states in shaping this Opinion or presenting their views to the Court serves as an implicit endorsement of its contents, which further enhances its strength and influence. For example, the memorial and oral pleading submitted by the Egyptian government expressed a supportive stance on climate justice, aligning with the position of other Global South nations affected by climate change. It focused on the historical responsibility of the Global North, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, compensation for loss and damage, and the link between climate change and fundamental human rights, including the right to life, health, a healthy environment, and development. Without a doubt, all these memorials and oral pleadings reflect the state's vision for climate justice, a vision that helps national judges follow the same path and build upon this in environmental and climate litigation.
The Role of Climate Litigation in Closing the Climate Ambition Gap: The UN's climate litigation report, which provides an update on climate lawsuits worldwide, affirmed that global ambition remains insufficient to address the climate crisis. Despite improvements in mitigation and adaptation efforts in many countries and the increase in corporate commitments to "net-zero emissions," the international community is still far from achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement. In this context, the role of advisory opinions from international courts is to bolster climate litigation efforts. The Opinion provides a clear legal framework that can be relied upon by local and international courts, thereby helping to pressure governments and corporations to increase their ambition and fulfill their climate commitments, and thus bridge the gap between declared goals and actual reality.
The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Advisory Opinion: The request to the African Court emphasizes that African states are the most affected by climate disasters despite their minimal contribution to global emissions. It highlights the devastating impacts of climate change on human rights on the continent, citing real-world examples such as water scarcity in North Africa, which threatens security and stability, and heatwaves and droughts affecting food security in West Africa. The request also raises sensitive issues concerning the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, especially regarding "carbon projects" that may violate their fundamental rights and lead to land disputes. We believe that the Advisory Opinion from the ICJ strengthens the chances of the African Court accepting and issuing its own advisory opinion, which is still under consideration. What distinguishes the African request is that it is the first of its kind in the history of climate cases to be submitted by civil society organizations, not states, which underscores the pivotal role of these organizations in advancing climate justice.
Summary
As stated in the Preamble of the Paris Agreement on climate change, the parties recognize the need for an effective and progressive response to the urgent threat posed by climate change, based on the best available scientific knowledge and considering each party's different national capacities and circumstances. The parties also recognize the importance of the participation of all levels of government and various actors, in accordance with national legislation, in addressing climate change. In this context, the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice serves as a prescriptive guide from the highest international judicial body.
It directs the parties on how to achieve this effective and progressive response, not only for judges and lawyers concerned with environmental laws but also for environmental and climate policymakers and those who implement them. The Opinion clarifies that this legal guide requires them to observe the principles of human rights and justice when formulating and implementing these policies and laws, while also considering all the other aspects mentioned in the Opinion.