International court says countries must protect human right to clean climate

(CN) — The Inter-American Court of Human Rights established on Thursday that states must act with due diligence in the context of the climate emergency and that a human rights perspective must be present in the implementation of policies mitigating the risks of climate change.

Judge Nancy Hernández López, President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, summarized the court's 234-page advisory opinion issued in ten main points.

"The climate emergency can only be addressed adequately through urgent actions and effective measures to mitigate, adapt and progress towards sustainable development coordinated with a human rights perspective and always with a view towards resilience," said Hernández López.

The court's advisory opinion responds to a request brought by Chile and Colombia on Jan. 9, 2023 to clarify state role in responding to climate change within the framework of international human rights laws.

The Inter-American Court considered two multiple-day hearings last year — a Barbados hearing in April and Brazil hearing in May — in order to give their advisory opinion.

"Any stalling of climate policies must be duly justified based on objective criteria and follow the standards of necessities and proportionality," Hernández López said. "States must adopt all the necessary measures to decrease the risk caused by the degradation of the global climate system."

The court outlined that state and non-state actors must insure accountability with mitigation strategies that align with human rights and environmental laws. One of the accountability strategies is that states cannot pursue development that harm the integrity of ecosystems and must provide a prior environmental impact assessment for major development and account for past environmental damage.

"The obligation to preserve the balance and equilibrium [of the environment] must be interpreted as an international duty and an imperative one," said Hernández López. "The court recognizes the existence of human right to a healthy climate. This recognition responds to the need of providing the Inter-American legal order with a basis to clearly delineate states obligations considering climate crisis and demanding autonomous compliance regarding other duties linked to environmental protection."

The court defined a healthy climate as one that has no anthropogenic interference that may be dangerous to human beings and nature as a whole and stated that the right to a healthy climate has individual and collective connotations.

The court also acknowledged that climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable populations.

"Vulnerability is worsened particularly when these people are in a situation of multi-dimensional poverty which applied their exposure to risks and reduced even more any possibilities to overcome adverse consequences of climate change," Hernández López said. She cited that the legal principles of equality and anti-discrimination points to specific obligations for the states to protect its most vulnerable populations from the harmful effects of climate change.

Liliana Ávila, Director of the Human Rights and Environmental Program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, hailed the court decision as a positive historic step.

"First, the world's courts are calling on states to commit to their international obligations to address climate change. And to avoid human rights violations," said Ávila in an interview following the decision. "The court speaks of the binding nature of its decision for all states on the continent, not just those that signed the American Convention on Human Rights."

The American Convention on Human Rights, also known as the Pact of San José, is an international human rights treaty adopted in 1977 by the Organization of American States. The Costa Rica-based Inter-American Court of Human Rights is the judicial body of the Organization of American States. Neither the U.S. nor Canada have ratified the treaty.

Ávila also mentioned the importance of the legal recognition of the right to a healthy environment.

"The law of a healthy environment speaks to the principle of intergenerational equity. That principle basically says that states have the duty to take action to prevent climate degradation from impacting the rights of future generations," she said.

"The court also reinforced the obligation of the state to take actions against companies — private or state-owned — who violate human rights. The state is obligated to urge companies based in the country to operate and take effective measures to combat climate change," she said.

Ávila said the court's decision is binding and can be invoked in environmental litigation.

"State apparatuses and all their branches of power must adapt their legislation and their institutions accordingly," she said.

Other environmental groups are celebrating the court's opinion and its importance on future environmental litigation.

"Advisory opinions are authoritative statements of binding international law and carry substantial legal weight. This Opinion will guide climate litigation at the local, regional, and national courts, and provide a foundation for climate policymaking, grounding local legislation and global negotiations in legal obligation, not just in the Americas but around the world," said the the Center for International Environmental Law in a press release on Thursday.

Vanuatu, a Pacific Island country was the first country to offer a written statement on the court decision outside of the Americas region. Vanuatu is leading a similar climate initiative in the International Court of Justice.

"The scientific consensus is clear: human-induced climate change is accelerating and driving widespread and severe impacts, disproportionately affecting developing countries and vulnerable communities. Increasingly, international legal processes are reinforcing what science has long shown—that responsibility for climate harms can be traced, and that action must be guided by established principles of law and justice," the Vanuatu government said in a statement.