“The Hague Hears Urgent Plea from Small Island Nations: ‘We Will Not Go Quietly into the Rising Sea'”

In a historic and closely watched series of hearings at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the threat of climate change took center stage as small island nations like Tuvalu made their case for urgent action to combat the devastating impact of rising sea levels.

Phillipa Webb, a lawyer representing Tuvalu, issued a stark warning to the court, declaring that “Tuvalu will not go quietly into the rising sea.” This sentiment was echoed by other small island nations, including Vanuatu and the Philippines, who fear that they could disappear under the waters if drastic measures are not taken to address climate change.

The United Nations General Assembly had asked the court to clarify what countries worldwide are legally required to do to combat climate change and assist vulnerable nations in dealing with its effects. This led to the largest case in the court’s history, with 96 countries and 11 international organizations participating in the hearings at the Peace Palace.

The court has been tasked with answering two key questions: what are countries obligated to do under international law to protect the climate from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, and what are the legal consequences for governments that significantly harm the climate and environment through their actions or inaction.

While any decision by the court would be nonbinding, it could serve as a powerful symbol and basis for future legal actions, including domestic lawsuits. Activists could potentially bring lawsuits against their own countries for failing to comply with the court’s decision, and states could hold each other accountable based on the court’s interpretation of international law.

Major greenhouse gas emitters like the United States have argued that the landmark Paris Agreement, which aims to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, should be the guiding framework for addressing climate change. However, many participating countries believe that the Paris Agreement does not go far enough to protect vulnerable nations from the impacts of climate change.

With 15 judges from around the world now considering the oral and written submissions from the hearings, a decision from the court is not expected until late 2025. Despite the lengthy process, the hearings have been hailed as a watershed moment for human rights, climate justice, and accountability, setting the stage for potential legal actions to address the urgent threat of climate change on a global scale.