The Biden administration argued Wednesday before the United Nations Supreme Court that the Paris Agreement is sufficient and countries should not have additional legal obligations to combat the climate emergency, leading scientists, advocacy groups and vulnerable Pacific Islanders to argue faced a backlash from
The US position, outlined at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) by State Department Legal Counsel Margaret Taylor, has been deemed “morally bankrupt” by Oxfam America, stating that “countries have no clear mandate to reduce carbon pollution”. He criticized the administration’s assertion that there is no legal obligation to do so. Especially as we prepare to hand over executive power to climate change deniers like President-elect Donald Trump. ”
“This opposition to strong international law on climate justice critically undermines the Biden administration’s climate change legacy,” Ashfaq Khalfan, director of climate justice at Oxfam America, said on Wednesday. “The United States today announced a commitment to reduce carbon pollution to safer levels, phase out fossil fuel production, and provide funding to low-income countries to support renewable energy and protection from climate change. Governments have failed to do what is necessary. To protect humanity from the climate crisis, the ICJ will hold them accountable by urging concrete action to ensure climate justice. is essential.”
“The United Nations climate change regime, with the Paris Agreement at its core, is the only international legal regime designed specifically for countries to address climate change,” Taylor said in a presentation in The Hague on Wednesday. Through collaborative efforts, we have the best hope for protecting the climate system for the benefit of current and future generations.”
Although the Paris Agreement is technically a legally binding international treaty, it has failed to stop the rise in global warming carbon emissions, which soared to record highs this year. The deal, from which the U.S. is expected to withdraw for the second time under the Trump administration, has no enforcement mechanism and its language prohibits burning fossil fuels at levels that scientists say are incompatible with a livable future. There is plenty of room for each country to continue.
“The United States is content with business as usual and is doing everything it can to avoid historical responsibilities, ignore human rights, and deny climate justice.”
Delta Melner, chief scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Climate Litigation Science Hub, said the United States, the biggest polluter in history, resisted “demands for climate accountability” at Wednesday’s ICJ hearing. criticized.
“Instead of taking responsibility for its contribution to the climate crisis, the United States will use that 30-minute window to downplay the role of courts in global climate action and to impose non-binding national policies under the Paris Agreement. “It emphasized commitment and rejected the concept of historical responsibility,” Melner said. “By framing climate change as a collective action challenge, without clear legal obligations for individual nations, the United States has been able to create redress and binding accountability measures that advance justice for climate-vulnerable countries. denied the possibility of
Melner added: “We applaud the leadership of countries like Vanuatu for moving this process forward in the face of obstruction from major polluters.” “These proceedings must continue to center the voices of frontline communities.”
The Pacific island of Vanuatu began requesting ICJ advisory opinions on climate issues for the first time in 2021. Less than two years ago, the United Nations General Assembly approved a resolution asking the ICJ to issue an opinion on states’ legal obligations in the global fight against climate change. climate change.
Vanuatu’s special envoy for climate change and the environment, Ralph Regenbanu, criticized the US presentation at Wednesday’s landmark hearing, saying treaties like the Paris Agreement are “a veil of inaction and a substitute for legal liability”. He said it couldn’t happen.
“These countries (some of the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters) point to existing treaties and commitments that unfortunately fail to incentivize significant reductions in emissions,” Regenbanu said. said. “We need to account for our failure to curb emissions and the climate change impacts and human rights violations that result from that failure.”
Vishal Prasad, director of the Pacific Islands Students’ Association Fighting Climate Change, expressed outrage, calling it “a disheartening attempt by the United States to shirk its responsibility as one of the world’s biggest polluters.”
Prasad added: “The United States is content with business as usual and is doing everything it can to evade its historical responsibilities, ignore human rights, and deny climate justice.”
