World Court declares climate change an ‘existential threat’ in historic ruling

#World #Court #declares #climate #change #existential #threat #historic #ruling

On Wednesday, the world’s high court began providing an expected decision, stating that countries faced legal responsibilities to prevent climate change and should the pollution pay the results.

This is the biggest case ever in the International Court of Justice, and experts say that the opinion of the judges can renew the climate justice, which will have a major impact on the laws around the world.

In the opening remarks, ICJ President Yuji Esawa said the results of climate change are “severe and far -reaching: they affect both the natural ecosystem and the human population”.

“These results indicate the immediate and existential threats posed by climate change,” he said.

Wanwatu, the Pacific island of Pacific, made a pressure offering for judicial opinion amid the growing frustration over the slow progress in the UN climate negotiations.

Vanwatu’s Climate Change Minister, Ralph Regiono, said the ICJ’s decision could be a “game changer” in the fight against global warming.

“We have been going through it for 30 years … it will change the story, which we need,” Reginov told AFP.

The United Nations has handed over 15 UN judges to a UN court that decides the dispute between the United Nations, to answer two basic questions.

First: What should the states do under international law to protect the environment from the emissions of greenhouse gases “for current and incoming generations?

Second: What are the consequences of the states whose emissions have caused environmental damage, especially the states of the weak lower island?

The ICJ consulting opinions are not bound by the states, and critics say that high pollution will easily ignore the departure of the court.

But other people note the moral and legal conflicts achieved by the world’s highest court and hope that this opinion will make a solid difference between national climate change policies and ongoing legal battles.

Andrew Rhine, deputy director of the Law Division of the UN Environment Program, said that the ICJ should “make it clear how the international law applies to the climate crisis.”

He told AFP, and it affects national courts, legislative processes and public debates. “

To help answer these two questions, ICJ judges have submitted tens of thousands of pages from countries and organizations around the world.

Analysts say the most results of recent decisions regarding climate change in international law on Wednesday as the courts become a battleground.

Outside the court in the Hague, about one hundred protesters hoisted flags and posters, which have shouted slogans like “further delays, climate justice today”.

The cases often occur from the climate -driven parties and countries, with foam fuel pulling at the pace of progress towards preventing the planet’s warming pollution.

The Paris Agreement, which has been signed through the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate (UNFCC), has given rise to a global response to the crisis, but not at the pace to protect the world from dangerous heat.

‘Missing under the waves’

In December, the famous Peace Palace in the Hague hosted the biggest hearing of the court so far, in which more than 100 countries and groups made verbal statements.

In the “David vs. Golith” war, the debate fought against the smallest, less developed states at the mercy of a hot planet against the largest wealthy economies.

Large pollution, including the United States and India, warned the ICJ not to present a fresh legal map for climate change, and discuss the current UNFCC debate.

The United States, which has since been withdrawn from the Paris Accord, said that the UNFCCC has legal provisions regarding climate change and the court has appealed to maintain the government.

But smaller states said that this framework is insufficient to reduce the devastating effects of climate change and that the ICJ’s opinion should be wider.

These states also appealed to the ICJ to react to historical pollution.

Representing Vinawato, Margaretta Vivork Singh said, “The basic principle is clearly clear. Responsible states need to fully strengthen their injury.”

These states demanded fierce fuel, monetary compensation when appropriate, and a timeline to admit past mistakes.

Representatives of the states of the island, wearing many traditional clothing when they addressed the court for the first time in the history of their country, pleaded enthusiastically to the lobby judges.

“At the current pace of GHG emissions, despite producing less than 0.01 % of greenhouse gas emissions, Tolo will completely disappear under the waves that are wrapping our beaches for thousands.”

Vishal Prasad, the director of a campaign for Pacific Island Students, who pushed the issue forward to the court, said that the climate change “if we are not right, will be disastrous with years.”

He told AFP, “The urgency of this matter, why we are here and how important it is, all the islands of the Pacific are not lost on the countries of all the small islands,” he told AFP, “That’s why we are looking for ICJ.”