Barbados has welcomed a historic opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the responsibility of states for climate change – a move that Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley has described as a major win for small island developing states in their fight against the climate crisis.
In a statement issued today, the Prime Minister said the opinion affirms Barbados’ longstanding legal and moral stance on the climate emergency and strengthens the country’s position on the global stage.
“This opinion, coupled with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ recent opinion on the Climate Emergency and Human Rights, entirely justify Barbados’ longstanding approach to the climate crisis. This opinion now provides us with a strong footing in the international legal order to keep putting our case,” she said.
Barbados participated in ICJ proceedings for the first time, joining over 100 states and international organisations that made submissions – many also doing so for the first time. The United Nations General Assembly is expected to take the matter forward during its 80th session in New York this September.
Among the ICJ’s key conclusions were that states have both procedural and substantive obligations under international law to address climate change, that sea-level rise does not affect the statehood or maritime boundaries of island nations, and that greenhouse gas emissions may be considered maritime pollution. It also confirmed that states could be held responsible for harm caused by climate change and may be liable to pay compensation in appropriate cases.
Barbados has indicated it will study the ICJ and Inter-American Court opinions closely to determine their application at national, regional and international levels.
Key takeaways of the opinion:
• Climate treaties do not override other international law: The ICJ confirmed that the UNFCCC, Paris Agreement and Kyoto Protocol work alongside other sources of international law, including the customary duty to prevent environmental harm.
• States have significant obligations under climate treaties: These include both procedural duties and outcome-based responsibilities, meaning emitting states cannot use treaties to avoid real action.
• Customary law requires states to prevent harm: Even if climate change results from widespread actions, states must still regulate activities within their borders and ensure they meet stringent due diligence standards, including environmental impact assessments.
• Sea-level rise does not affect statehood or maritime zones: Small island states will not lose maritime rights due to sea-level rise, and greenhouse gas emissions are recognised as maritime pollution.
• Right to a healthy environment linked to human rights: The right to life, health, and housing imply a right to a clean and healthy environment. Climate refugees also cannot be returned to unsafe conditions.
• States can be held responsible and liable for harm: Emissions can be attributed to individual states, even if multiple actors are involved. A “sufficiently direct and certain causal nexus” can establish liability, including the potential for compensation.
• Obligations are enforceable by all states: The ICJ recognised that climate obligations are erga omnes partes, meaning any state can pursue enforcement against another.
• Court invites future climate cases: While this was an advisory opinion and did not name specific states, the ICJ signalled that it would be willing to consider liability in future contentious cases where sufficient evidence exists.
The post Barbados welcomes landmark ICJ opinion on climate responsibility appeared first on nationnews.com.