The Special Envoy for Climate Change and Environment for the Republic of Vanuatu, Ralph Regenvanu presented the opening oral submissions before the International Court of Justice in the Advisory Proceedings on the Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change on 2 December 2024.
It is with a profound sense of urgency and responsibility that I stand before you today, representing the Republic of Vanuatu, along with the Melanesian Spearhead Group, in these historic proceedings. The outcome of these proceedings will reverberate across generations, determining the fate of nations like mine and the future of our planet.
Vanuatu is a nation of islands and island peoples. Our peoples have built vibrant cultures and traditions over millennia that are intimately intertwined with our ancestral lands and seas. Yet today, we find ourselves on the frontlines of a crisis we did not create—a crisis that threatens our very existence and that of so many other peoples who have come in unprecedented numbers to be heard by this Court.
The importance of the questions before this Court cannot be overstated. At issue in this case is the legality under the entire corpus of international law of a certain conduct, displayed by specific States over time, which has interfered with the climate system to a point that has already caused significant harm to Vanuatu and that threatens the survival of my people and of humanity as a whole.
The General Assembly, acting by consensus, defined this conduct in clear terms.
First, in question (a), the General Assembly refers to, and I quote “anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases”. As stated in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2023 Synthesis Report, and I quote “Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming”. This is not only a statement of the global scientific consensus; it was also adopted line-by-line with the consensus of all States, including all those present in these proceedings. The unprecedented risks created by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have been known since at least the 1960s, as detailed in our written submissions. Indeed, in an address of 8 February 1965, then-US President Lyndon Johnson identified the problem in the clearest terms, and I quote: “This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through radioactive materials and a steady increase in carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels”.
Second, the General Assembly specifically referred in preambular paragraph 5 of Resolution 77/276 to, and I quote, “conduct of States over time in relation to activities that contribute to climate change and its adverse effects”. The conduct on trial is that of States, which have failed for over a century, despite increasingly dire warnings, to rein in the emissions from their territories. I must emphasise that since 1990 emissions have increased by over 50%, reaching an all-time high in 2023. More than half of all CO2 emissions since 1750 were emitted after 1990. Whatever the timeframe, there is no excuse.
Third, a handful of readily identifiable States have produced the vast majority of historic and current greenhouse gas emissions. Yet other countries, including my own, are suffering the brunt of the consequences. The IPCC has recognised this climate injustice, stating, and I quote “Vulnerable communities who have historically contributed the least to current climate change are disproportionately affected”. The definition of the relevant conduct in Question (b) thus reflects the beating heart of the request when it asks the Court to determine the “legal consequences” arising for States whose, and I quote “acts and omissions … have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment”.
The question is therefore simple at its core. Having regard to their obligations under international law, have those States responsible for climate change acted lawfully? Vanuatu’s position is clear: the conduct responsible for this crisis is unlawful under a range of international obligations, including those explicitly mentioned in Resolution 77/276. This is a legal case and, as the Court will know from the written submissions, we are far from alone in making it.
Mr. President, Mme Vice-President, Members of the Court, our delegation has just returned from the recent COP29 in Baku, where we witnessed firsthand, once again, the failure of the process. It is unconscionable that the COP failed to reach any agreement on cutting emissions. The current emission reduction commitments of States, even if fully respected, will see a catastrophic increase in temperature. For many peoples, including in Vanuatu, the prolonged and systemic failure of the COP process has cost them their well-being, cultures, even lives. There is an urgent need for a collective response to climate change grounded not in political convenience, but in international law.
The Court, as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, is uniquely positioned to provide authoritative guidance under the entire corpus of international law. We look to the Court for recognition that the conduct which has already caused immense harm to my people and so many others is unlawful, that it must cease, and that its consequences must be repaired.
In closing, I choose my words carefully when I say that this may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity. Let us not allow future generations to look back and wonder why the cause of their doom was condoned.
