However, if states do not follow suit, the ICJ clearly stated the consequences: “Failure of a State to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from GHG emissions — including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies — may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that State. The Court also emphasizes that the internationally wrongful act in question is not the emission of GHGs per se, but the breach of conventional and customary obligations identified under question (a) pertaining to the protection of the climate system from significant harm resulting from anthropogenic emissions of such gases.” (427). This includes the mitigation obligations under the Paris Agreement.
Conclusions In the, so far, 10 years of its existence, the Paris Agreement has often been dismissively characterized as “soft”, “weak” or “voluntary”. The Court set an end to such misleading characterization. When it comes to mitigation, there is no voluntarism. All parties to the Paris Agreement have an obligation of result to prepare, communicate and maintain successive and progressive NDC, and a substantive obligation of conduct to act with stringent due diligence in putting forward increasingly demanding NDCs at the level of their highest possible ambition, that make an adequate contribution to achieving the 1.5oC goal, in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. They also must pursue, as a matter of obligation of conduct based on stringent due diligence, domestic mitigation measures capable of achieving the objectives set out in their NDCs. While the ICJ Advisory Opinion contains many important, far-reaching findings, this one might have the most direct and immediate impact. Zitieren als Christina Voigt, The ICJ and the UN Climate Regime: Clarifying Mitigation Obligations Under the Paris Agreement, Völkerrechtsblog, 04.08.2025, doi: 10.17176/20250805-122408-0.
Während die AO des ICJ kein leichte Lektüre ist, würde ich mich als Bürger in Ö eigentlich schon erwarten, dass ein #NRAbg sich damit beschäftigt haben.
www.icj-cij.org/case/187
Zur Unterstützung gibt es auch viele Kommentare zB diesen: voelkerrechtsblog.org/de/the-icj-a...
