State obligations with respect to climate change

On 23 July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) unanimously delivered a landmark advisory opinion concerning the states’ obligations relating to climate change. Backed by 130 countries, Vanuatu’s initiative led the UN General Assembly to request an advisory opinion from the ICJ. This historic but non-binding opinion from the world’s highest court marked a substantial jurisprudential development in international climate law, especially providing support to Small Island Developing States. The opinion elucidates two issues: the legal responsibilities of the states, and legal consequences under these obligations for the harms already caused by the states, denoting climate change as an ‘existential threat’. It laid out the binding legal obligations concerning equitable climate governance measures and established breaches as internationally wrongful acts.

Based on this advisory opinion, a draft UN General Assembly Resolution on climate change now endeavours to operationalise actionable steps and liabilities. On 6 February 2026, the Government of Vanuatu and a cross-regional core group of states put forward a ‘zero draft’ resolution to endorse the ICJ opinion in its entirety and advance climate action and litigation. An official briefing on the draft resolution was held on 1 May 2026 by a core group of UN Member States and facilitated by the Permanent Mission of Vanuatu to the United Nations, with a view to encouraging delegations to co-sponsor the draft resolution at the next UN Session to be held later in May. This resolution endorses the ICJ opinion and requests the UN Secretary General to prepare a report containing ways to advance compliance with all obligations in relation to the court’s findings, in consultation with the Member States.

Undoubtedly, achieving legal clarity while on the verge of climate-induced vulnerabilities worldwide, coupled with collective action and political will articulated through a formal resolution, can bolster the future of climate justice. However, a critical question arises as to why there is need for a UNGA Resolution after the momentous ICJ’s advisory opinion. Prominently, if adopted, this resolution cannot directly force Member States to act, since the UN General Assembly’s resolutions lack a binding effect. However, its far-reaching impact can determine global expectations, legal debates and political interventions on climate obligations. As it unequivocally advocates for implementing the opinion, the multilateral cooperation of the member states now confirms their agreement with the ICJ’s legal interpretations. A duly adopted UNGA resolution reinforces political weight, influencing international legal norms, geopolitics, financial mechanisms and diplomacy.

Moreover, states exacerbate climate destruction by emitting greenhouse gases, among others, and the resolution demands action to regulate those activities. Moreover, mandated by the UNFCCC, the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol, operationalising the ICJ’s opinion requires rigorous domestic implementation through legislation, policies and regulations. Since the resolution reinforces international commitments, it will be helpful to exert pressure on the relevant states. As a result, vulnerable states like Vanuatu, Barbados, Bangladesh, Maldives, the Philippines, etc., which are disproportionately impacted because of climate crisis, will come at the front in the global climate action.

The advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice elucidates two issues: the legal responsibilities of the states and the legal consequences under these obligations for the harms already caused by the states, denoting climate change as an ‘existential threat’. It laid out the binding legal obligations concerning equitable climate governance measures and established breaches as internationally wrongful acts.

After informal negotiations in this context, on 1 May 2026, the core groups of member states conducted a briefing event on the final draft resolution, pointing out the future of negotiations bringing law and co-operation at the centre of climate action. Promoting due diligence and good faith, simultaneously terming climate change as ‘an unprecedented challenge of civilizational proportions’, this draft resolution urges states to implement measures achieving the collective temperature goal. That is, preventing global temperatures from exceeding the 1.5°C limit. Additionally, aiming to increase the global average annual rate of energy optimisation twofold by 2030; providing full reparation to the injured States by restitution; encouraging equal participation of indigenous people, women and girls, youth and persons with disabilities and preventing irreparable harm to the right to life.

Complementarity, not competition, as delegates proclaimed, should be the purpose of the UNGA resolution if all states reach consensus on climate protection. Hence, no more delay can be afforded- climate justice should be ensured for the communities that contribute less to climate change but mostly suffer its adverse impacts. Compliance by the states, co-operation among the states and coherence in climate response while establishing inter-generational equity are the priorities underlying this UNGA resolution.

The writer is student of law, University of Dhaka.