Berliner Boersenzeitung - 'David v Goliath' battle at ICJ climate hearings

EUR -
AED 4.243598
AFN 76.263586
ALL 93.252722
AMD 423.077847
AOA 1060.756747
ARS 1729.009179
AUD 1.63715
AWG 2.082804
AZN 1.965146
BAM 1.957373
BBD 2.326069
BDT 142.954868
BHD 0.435742
BIF 3457.859125
BMD 1.155508
BND 1.48089
BOB 14.025967
BRL 5.938617
BSD 1.154928
BTN 109.794748
BWP 15.661517
BYN 3.415745
BYR 22647.966202
BZD 2.322716
CAD 1.618749
CDF 2612.604653
CHF 0.93223
CLF 0.026748
CLP 1056.157931
CNY 7.799775
CNH 7.796366
COP 3677.625283
CRC 523.720823
CUC 1.155508
CUP 30.620975
CVE 110.577359
CZK 24.184522
DJF 205.35721
DKK 7.475388
DOP 67.30804
DZD 153.466204
EGP 57.550907
ERN 17.332627
ETB 184.823403
FJD 2.553308
FKP 0.858801
GBP 0.857994
GEL 3.021622
GGP 0.858801
GHS 13.548336
GIP 0.858801
GMD 84.931759
GNF 10148.261152
GTQ 8.809078
GYD 241.584711
HKD 9.063364
HNL 31.036971
HRK 7.533572
HTG 151.001333
HUF 361.860769
IDR 20659.336108
ILS 3.470858
IMP 0.858801
INR 109.864533
IQD 1514.293863
IRR 1588593.057877
ISK 141.815325
JEP 0.858801
JMD 183.527469
JOD 0.819276
JPY 182.208653
KES 149.488533
KGS 101.048565
KHR 4682.700886
KMF 493.401915
KRW 1644.196411
KWD 0.357306
KYD 0.962469
KZT 541.953128
LAK 26120.269022
LBP 103475.784612
LKR 387.551407
LRD 209.436313
LSL 18.846604
LTL 3.411917
LVL 0.698955
LYD 7.354819
MAD 10.762117
MDL 20.066037
MGA 4971.568067
MKD 61.524919
MMK 2425.761657
MNT 4157.747973
MOP 9.330357
MRU 46.312797
MUR 54.285874
MVR 17.852389
MWK 2007.117959
MXN 19.919233
MYR 4.724922
MZN 73.848488
NAD 18.858
NGN 1574.334577
NIO 42.504153
NOK 11.010667
NPR 175.672918
NZD 1.962891
OMR 0.444286
PAB 1.154903
PEN 3.9114
PGK 5.111391
PHP 70.137026
PKR 321.001615
PLN 4.301566
PYG 6887.534304
QAR 4.212695
RON 5.246245
RSD 117.344628
RUB 93.568896
RWF 1693.975431
SAR 4.336079
SBD 9.323045
SCR 16.772158
SDG 693.886139
SEK 10.959647
SGD 1.480021
SLE 28.422197
SOS 693.885368
SRD 43.525699
STD 23916.692567
STN 24.843432
SVC 10.10512
SZL 18.846478
THB 38.224452
TJS 10.659434
TMT 4.04428
TND 3.367128
TRY 54.991339
TTD 7.834295
TWD 37.299582
TZS 3062.095139
UAH 51.681828
UGX 4307.461152
USD 1.155508
UYU 46.437314
UZS 13790.993709
VES 871.497494
VND 30333.2531
VUV 138.157226
WST 3.162341
XAF 656.481659
XAG 0.018569
XAU 0.000271
XCD 3.122819
XCG 2.081381
XDR 0.817469
XOF 656.91048
XPF 119.331742
YER 273.71111
ZAR 18.847672
ZMK 10400.959138
ZMW 22.046238
ZWL 372.073259
  • RBGPF

    -1.2500

    69.74

    -1.79%

  • CMSC

    -0.0600

    21.73

    -0.28%

  • CMSD

    0.0200

    22.04

    +0.09%

  • BTI

    0.1500

    59.27

    +0.25%

  • NGG

    -0.1600

    80.26

    -0.2%

  • GSK

    -0.0700

    51.46

    -0.14%

  • BCC

    -1.6900

    84.8

    -1.99%

  • RIO

    2.5000

    101.51

    +2.46%

  • BCE

    0.0600

    22.06

    +0.27%

  • BP

    -1.2300

    41.21

    -2.98%

  • RELX

    -0.1900

    36.61

    -0.52%

  • JRI

    -0.0500

    12.67

    -0.39%

  • RYCEF

    0.6500

    21

    +3.1%

  • AZN

    5.8800

    161.5

    +3.64%

  • VOD

    -0.3800

    15.31

    -2.48%

'David v Goliath' battle at ICJ climate hearings
'David v Goliath' battle at ICJ climate hearings / Photo: Robin van Lonkhuijsen - ANP/AFP

'David v Goliath' battle at ICJ climate hearings

Halfway through marathon climate change hearings at the world's top court, battle lines are being drawn between developed countries urging judges to stick to current legal obligations and vulnerable nations pleading for more.

Text size:

History is being made at the International Court of Justice, with the largest-ever number of countries and institutions seeking to sway judges crafting a legal framework for the global fight against climate change.

Most major economies, including the United States, China, and India, have argued that the court should not tamper with the existing United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Speaking in the panelled splendour of the ICJ's Great Hall of Justice, the representative for the US said this framework was "the most current expression of states' consent to be bound by international law in respect of climate change."

Margaret Taylor urged the 15-judge ICJ panel "to ensure that its opinion preserves and promotes the centrality of this regime."

Representatives from fellow top polluters China and India struck a similar chord, as did Australia and Germany.

India was perhaps the most explicit, warning the court against piling on more legal obligations on states.

"The court should avoid the creation of any new or additional obligations beyond those already existing under the climate change regime," said their representative Luther Rangreji.

On the other side of the debate were representatives of tiny island nations, some taking the ICJ floor for the first time in their country's history, many in colourful national dress.

Many of them argued, using powerful examples of loss and devastation, that their homelands were being destroyed by climate change, a phenomenon they had nothing to do with.

"This is a crisis of survival. It is also a crisis of equity," said Fiji's representative, offering searing testimony of people being uprooted from ancestral lands.

"Our people... are unfairly and unjustly footing the bill for a crisis they did not create. They look to this court for clarity, for decisiveness and justice," he added.

"Your legal guidance will resonate across generations, shaping a legacy of accountability, protection, and hope for all people," Luke Daunivalu told the judges.

More than 100 countries and organisations are participating in the hearings that enter their second week on Monday.

After months or even years of deliberation, the ICJ will produce a non-binding advisory opinion -- a fresh blueprint for international climate change law.

- 'In this canoe together' -

Statements from rich countries and top polluters have sparked fury from campaigners. They accuse them of "hiding behind" existing agreements such as the 2015 Paris Agreement, seen by many as insufficient to tackle the problem.

"We're seeing a true David and Goliath battle playing out," said Joie Chowdhury, a senior lawyer at the US- and Swiss-based Center for International Environmental Law.

"Some of the world's biggest polluters, like the US and Australia, have effectively tried to sweep historical conduct and longstanding knowledge of the causes and consequences of climate change under the rug," she said.

At the heart of the issue is money.

The United Nations asked the ICJ to rule on two distinct questions.

First, what were the obligations of countries in the fight against climate change?

Second, what were the consequences for states that have harmed the environment, particularly of the most vulnerable countries?

Developing countries have been left frustrated by the money handed down to combat the effects of climate change -- the most recent example being the $300 billion annually by 2035 pledged at the COP29 in Baku.

The text "encourages" developing countries to "make contributions" that would remain "voluntary".

Many smaller countries put a powerful case before ICJ judges for more equitable contributions that would in some cases be their only lifeline.

One of the more colourful pleas came from John Silk representing the Marshall Islands.

"When I walk our shores, I see more than eroding coastlines, I see the disappearing footprints of generations of Marshallese who lived in harmony on these islands," Silk told the court.

"The Marshallese people have a saying: 'Wa kuk wa jimor', meaning 'We are in this canoe together'."

"Today, I extend this principle to our global community."

(Y.Berger--BBZ)