WYCJ Symposium: Outcomes of This Advisory Opinion

Introduction

This article concludes the symposium by examining the likely outcomes of a proposed advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on climate change and human rights.

Earlier contributions in the series argued for the urgency and legal basis of such an opinion. This final piece focuses on what the opinion could actually achieve in practice, especially for:

1. international environmental law

2. legal treatment of climate science

3. domestic and regional courts

4. youth advocacy and global governance

The article centres the campaign of World’s Youth for Climate Justice, a youth-led movement advocating for ICJ guidance on states’ climate obligations.

Why an ICJ Advisory Opinion Matters

The International Court of Justice can issue advisory opinions when authorised UN bodies request legal clarification on international questions.

Although advisory opinions are not formally binding on states, they often carry substantial legal and moral authority. Historically, ICJ advisory opinions have shaped international law on issues such as:

• genocide reservations

• self-determination

• reparations for UN officials

• legality of nuclear weapons

• occupied territories

Because the ICJ had not yet ruled directly on climate obligations at the time of this article, a climate advisory opinion could become the most authoritative international legal statement on the issue.

1. Impact on International Environmental Law

A climate advisory opinion could clarify how existing bodies of law apply to the climate crisis, including:

• international environmental law

• human rights law

• law of state responsibility

• obligations of cooperation

• duties to prevent transboundary harm

The author stresses that success depends heavily on asking the right legal question at the United Nations General Assembly stage.

If framed carefully, the request could help the Court define how human rights and environmental law interact in the climate context.

That would strengthen the development of a more coherent international climate justice framework.

2. Legal Interpretation of Climate Science

One major challenge in climate litigation is how courts treat scientific evidence, including reports from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Some domestic courts have treated IPCC reports as policy material rather than formal evidence.

The article argues an ICJ advisory opinion could help by:

• recognising scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change

• affirming the evidentiary value of IPCC assessments

• translating scientific findings into legal obligations

• reducing politicisation of climate science

That could give courts worldwide stronger foundations for climate rulings.

3. Guidance for Regional and Domestic Courts

Climate litigation is increasingly occurring before national and regional courts. Many cases concern:

• emissions reduction duties

• environmental harm

• corporate responsibility

• adaptation failures

• protection of vulnerable communities

An ICJ advisory opinion could provide persuasive guidance to judges interpreting climate obligations.

In particular, it could help courts recognise the legal connection between:

• human rights

• intergenerational equity

• state duties to prevent climate harm

It could also inspire stronger domestic legislation regulating polluters and protecting future generations.

4. Impact of Youth Advocacy

A central theme of the article is that young people have become major actors in climate accountability efforts.

Youth plaintiffs and movements have brought or supported cases in countries including:

• Australia

• Canada

• Colombia

• India

• Mexico

• Pakistan

• South Korea

The WYCJ campaign is presented as evidence that youth movements can shape high-level international governance.

According to the author, seeking an ICJ advisory opinion is not only about law—it is also about ensuring younger generations are heard in decisions affecting their future.

The Way Forward

The campaign began in the Pacific and expanded globally across:

• Asia

• Africa

• Europe

• Latin America

A key supporter mentioned is Vanuatu, whose government announced support for pursuing an advisory opinion through the United Nations General Assembly.

Because NGOs cannot directly bring cases before the ICJ, state support is essential.

This means the campaign depends on diplomacy, coalition-building, and persuading a majority of UN member states.

Challenges

The article recognises several obstacles:

Legal hurdles

• NGOs lack standing before the ICJ

• UNGA approval is needed

• wording of the legal question is crucial

Political hurdles

• resistance from states wary of stronger obligations

• geopolitical bargaining

• differing economic interests

Practical hurdles

• even a favourable advisory opinion would still need implementation through politics, courts, and domestic law

Conclusion

The article argues that a climate advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice could have far-reaching consequences even without being binding.

It could:

• clarify international climate obligations

• strengthen use of climate science in law

• guide courts worldwide

• support intergenerational justice

• empower youth advocacy movements

The broader message is that climate justice is not only a policy debate—it is a legal question, and younger generations are increasingly demanding answers through international law.

Aditi Shetye was an environmental lawyer based in the UK and Academic Coordinator for World’s Youth for Climate Justice.