Climate Change

       Climate F.A.Q. Rising Home Insurance Costs Do Flight Offsets Work? What Actually Gets Recycled Climate Forward Newsletter

       Advertisement

       SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

       You have been granted access, use your keyboard to continue reading.

       Supported by

       SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

       Top Oceans Court Says Nations Must Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

       Experts say the opinion, though nonbinding, is likely to lead to more claims for damages against polluting nations.

       Share full article

       12

       Outside the main courtroom at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg, Germany, last year.Credit...Gregor Fischer/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

       By Marlise Simons

       Reporting from Paris

       May 21, 2024Updated 3:17 p.m. ET

       Sign up for Your Places: Global Update. All the latest news for any part of the world you select. Get it sent to your inbox.

       The world’s highest court dealing with the oceans issued a groundbreaking opinion on Tuesday that said excessive greenhouse gases were pollutants that could cause irreversible harm to the marine environment and must be cut back.

       The advisory opinion by the court, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, is not binding, but it stated that, legally, nations must take all necessary measures to reduce, control and prevent marine pollution caused by human-made greenhouse gas emissions.

       The 21 judges on the tribunal were unanimous in their opinion, and experts say it could lead to more wide-ranging claims for damages against polluting nations.

       The stance taken by the tribunal, which is sometimes called the Oceans Court, is also likely to affect how other international and national courts address the growing dangers posed by climate change.

       Advertisement

       SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

       The seas are vulnerable because the burning of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, warming the world and contributing to a rise in sea levels by melting glaciers and ice sheets. Climate change also contributes to the heating and acidification of ocean waters, which affects marine life and the food chain, among other dangers.

       The request for an advisory opinion was made by a group of small island nations that are already affected by rising sea levels as their coasts erode or become inhabitable and fresh water for drinking and planting crops turns saline. The court’s opinion applies to the more than 165 countries that ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which includes large polluters such as China, Russia and India, but not the United States. (The Senate would not ratify the pact.)

       The convention is the legal framework that covers the uses of the oceans and their resources, including the obligation to to protect the marine environment.

       The opinion issued on Tuesday effectively expanded the definition of marine pollution to include greenhouse gases. The convention, which was negotiated in the 1970s, does not mention these emissions and their adverse effects on the world’s oceans, which are based on more recent science.

       “We did not know how serious these emissions were in the 1970s,” said David Freestone, the co-author of a World Bank report last year on the legal dimension of sea-level rise who has followed the hearings and debates at the court. “At that time, people were concerned about acid rain.”

       Advertisement

       SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

       Scientists say that protecting the ocean’s role on the planet is overdue. Seas cover 70 percent of the earth’s surface and provide half of the world’s oxygen. They also absorb almost all of the excess heat generated by greenhouse gases and are warming faster than predicted, bringing more climatic changes.

       Key questions addressed by the court included whether excessive greenhouse gases constitute “pollution of the marine environment” and, if so, whether countries can be held to account for that pollution. The judges said yes to both.

       Leaders of the island nations that brought the case argue that existing climate accords have not made enough progress to prevent lasting damage to the oceans. They say that while they contribute only a small fraction of global emissions, they are already bearing the brunt of catastrophic effects of the changing climate.

       “We got everything we asked for; we now have an authoritative definition of the obligations of states to avert irreversible harm,” said Payam Akhavan, the lead lawyer for the group of island nations, adding that the court “cited the best available science.”

       The judges also appeared to side with the island nations that had long sought help in vain, saying that larger polluting nations had a greater responsibility than small and vulnerable states and should provide financial help and technical assistance to them.

       Advertisement

       SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

       Activists present in the court, which is in Hamburg, Germany, sent a volley of messages applauding the decision. “For the first time, an international court has recognized that the fate of two global commons — the oceans and the atmosphere — are intertwined and imperiled by the climate crisis,” Joie Chowdhury of the Center for International Environmental Law wrote.

       Activists are increasingly taking on governments and energy companies for climate damages and have recently achieved rulings in their favor. In April, Europe’s highest human rights court unexpectedly sided with about 2,000 Swiss women over 64 years old who sued their government for not doing enough to prevent climate change. They said that their health was at risk during heat waves related to global warming.

       Two other institutions, the International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, have also been asked for advisory opinions on the legal implications of climate change. Their opinions are due later.

       Marlise Simons is a correspondent in the Paris bureau, focusing on international justice and war-crimes tribunals. In almost four decades at The New York Times, she has been based in France and Italy to report about Europe and previously covered Latin America from posts in Brazil and Mexico. More about Marlise Simons

       Read 12 Comments

       Share full article

       12

       Advertisement

       SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

       Comments 12Top Oceans Court Says Nations Must Reduce Greenhouse Gas EmissionsSkip to Comments Share your thoughts. The Times needs your voice. We welcome your on-topic commentary, criticism and expertise. Comments are moderated for civility.

       Tell us about yourself. Take the survey.