On July 24, 2025, the international climate policy landscape reached a pivotal juncture as the United Nations’ highest court began deliberating the responsibilities countries bear in addressing climate change. This move follows years of persistent advocacy from small island nations, whose existence is acutely threatened by rising sea levels and damaging weather extremes. As the world contends with escalating climate-related crises—most recently, widespread disruptions in global food prices due to exceptional weather events—this legal milestone signals a renewed urgency and hope that clear global obligations may lead to more enforceable agreements and coordinated action on climate change.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is set to issue a landmark advisory opinion on the climate obligations of countries, marking a significant step in international climate governance. While advisory opinions are not legally binding, they carry substantial weight and have the potential to clarify how existing international law—including human rights conventions and environmental treaties—applies to the climate crisis. This decision follows intense lobbying by nations most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, such as low-lying island states, highlighting a collective demand for stronger protection and accountability within the global community [1].
This push for greater accountability comes amid increasingly dire warnings from scientists and researchers. Multiple regions around the world are experiencing sharp food price shocks tied directly to extreme weather, which threatens crop yields and food security. According to recent research, unless net-zero emissions are reached, these disruptions are likely to become even more severe, intensifying the burden on already vulnerable populations [2]. The timing of the ICJ deliberations therefore reflects a broader recognition that action cannot wait, as the impacts of inaction are no longer abstract but are being felt in daily life.
At the same time, international climate negotiations have faced headwinds, particularly due to shifting geopolitical dynamics. The ongoing retreat of the United States from multilateral climate leadership has forced other countries to seek new strategies and alliances. Despite these challenges, many governments and organizations are redoubling their efforts to set ambitious targets and uphold past commitments. Calls are growing for the upcoming COP30 summit to shift focus from drafting new pledges to meeting the targets already established, making implementation and verification paramount in driving meaningful progress [3].
Against this complex backdrop, the involvement of the ICJ offers a beacon of optimism. By potentially clarifying states’ obligations, the court’s opinion could make it more difficult for any nation to shirk its responsibility—especially as global public opinion solidifies around the necessity for urgent action. The hope is that this milestone moment, driven by those most at risk, will spur countries toward renewed cooperation and more consistent implementation of climate policies. The world now awaits the court’s guidance, which could help unlock a new chapter of clearer, collective international commitment [1].
