The ICJ hearings, initiated by a UN General Assembly resolution, represent a pivotal moment in international climate law. Ninety-six countries and eleven regional organisations participated, each presenting their views on states’ obligations to address climate change.

On December 13, 2024, a groundbreaking moment unfolded at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as global leaders and legal experts convened to discuss the obligations of states in combatting climate change. The hearing marked the culmination of historic proceedings initiated by small island nations facing existential threats. It was a day charged with urgency, poignancy, and a collective resolve to safeguard the future of humanity and the planet.

Among the powerful voices was that of Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organisation (WHO), who eloquently framed the climate crisis as not just an environmental emergency but a profound health crisis. His address illuminated the devastating impacts of climate change on health systems and underscored the dire consequences of inaction.

The Personal Face of Climate Change

Dr. Tedros began his remarks with a deeply moving account of his visit to Tuvalu in 2019. He recalled meeting Falou, a young boy burdened with worries no child should bear. Falou and his friends spoke of the possibility of their island sinking due to rising sea levels. Some contemplated leaving for Fiji, while others expressed a heartbreaking determination to stay and sink with their homeland.

“Children should be children,” Dr. Tedros said, his voice heavy with emotion. “I would have loved if Falou was laughing and playing, but he wasn’t. They worry about the survival of their island homes due to emissions produced by distant nations.”

The story of Falou epitomised the stark inequities of the climate crisis. Small Island Developing States (SIDS) like Tuvalu contribute less than 1 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions but face disproportionate and severe consequences. Rising sea levels, extreme weather, and dwindling natural resources threaten their very existence.

Climate Change: A Health Crisis

Dr. Tedros emphasised that climate change is already wreaking havoc on human health. “This is not a hypothetical crisis in the future. It is here and now,” he declared.

WHO has been documenting the health impacts of climate change for over 25 years, and the evidence is sobering:

• Disease transmission patterns are shifting, with diseases like malaria, dengue, and cholera expanding their reach due to changing weather patterns.
• Noncommunicable diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular conditions are exacerbated by air pollution, which WHO links to seven million deaths annually.
• Extreme weather events, including record-breaking temperatures, hurricanes, and floods, are destroying health infrastructure and overwhelming systems already stretched thin.
• Water scarcity affects 920 million children globally, a number expected to rise as droughts and water contamination worsen.

Dr. Tedros highlighted the cascading effects of climate disruption on food security, displacement, and poverty. By 2030, over 130 million people could be pushed into extreme poverty, dramatically increasing health disparities.

A Matter of Equity and Justice

The health impacts of the climate crisis do not fall evenly. Vulnerable populations — women, children, ethnic minorities, and those in poverty — bear the brunt. Dr. Tedros called for a global response grounded in equity and justice, stressing that mitigation and adaptation measures must prioritise these at-risk groups.

Despite the dire warnings, Dr. Tedros offered hope. He highlighted WHO’s efforts to integrate health considerations into climate policies, including the Paris Agreement. He also pointed to the economic and health co-benefits of action, such as reducing air pollution through sustainable energy practices.

Global Perspectives on Climate Responsibilities

The ICJ hearings, initiated by a UN General Assembly resolution, represent a pivotal moment in international climate law. Ninety-six countries and eleven regional organisations participated, each presenting their views on states’ obligations to address climate change.

Small island nations like Vanuatu led the charge, arguing that the failure of high-emitting states constitutes an “internationally wrongful act.” Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu’s special envoy for climate change, underscored the stakes: “The outcome of these historic proceedings will determine the fate of nations like mine and the future of our planet.”

The hearings showcased a spectrum of perspectives:

• Brazil and China emphasised the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities,” asserting that developed nations bear the greatest burden due to their historical emissions.
• The United States, while acknowledging the crisis, argued that international treaties like the Paris Agreement are non-binding.
• The European Union highlighted the importance of cooperation, advocating for robust frameworks to address the crisis without enforcing new legal obligations.

The ICJ’s advisory opinion, expected in 2025, will not be legally binding but holds significant moral and legal weight. It could clarify international obligations, influence national courts, and guide future legislative developments.

Shaping the Future of Climate Law

Dr. Tedros concluded his address with a stark warning and a rallying cry. “Only a rapid and equitable phase-out of fossil fuels can protect the health of both people and the planet,” he said. Fossil fuels still account for 80 per cent of global primary energy, supported by subsidies exceeding $600 billion annually. This, he argued, must change.

He stressed the “co-benefits” of climate action, noting that pricing fossil fuels in line with their health impacts could save 1.2 million lives annually. Investments in climate and health actions yield significant economic returns, proving that the cost of inaction far outweighs the cost of intervention.

The ICJ hearings represent more than a legal exercise; they are a moral and ethical reckoning. They underscore the interconnectedness of humanity and the shared responsibility to act. For small island nations and vulnerable communities, the stakes are existential. For the world, the hearings offer a chance to define a just and sustainable future. As the ICJ deliberates, the world watches, hopeful that the advisory opinion will catalyse bold, collective action. The fight against climate change is a fight for survival—for people, for ecosystems, and for the generations yet to come.