Financing for development via climate reparations, not more loans.
This is what Caribbean economist Marla Dukharan envisages following the July 23 International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) landmark opinion on the obligation of states regarding the climate crisis.
Dukharan’s view, as outlined her July Caribbean Monthly Report, is that “ In my view therefore, this ICJ opinion opens the door for affected states to actively pursue funding for development and climate adaptation from their (former) colonisers, who are historically the world’s worst polluters”.
“For the first time ever, we have an opinion delivered by the world’s highest court that acknowledges the fact that we can quantify the historical and current carbon emissions by state, so we can therefore quantify the extent of climate-driven damage by state, and the resulting obligation to make reparation,” she said.
“This is especially powerful in the context of developing countries, and [small island developing states] in particular, who are at once struggling with already unsustainable debt burdens and the rising cost of ‘development’, in the face of planetary boundaries and climate obligations, alongside mounting climate risks.”
Dukharan noted that the matter before the ICJ was spearheaded by Vanuatu, the most at-risk country to natural disasters. Other countries, including Barbados, joined the action before the world’s highest court.
The economist noted that key elements of the ICJ’s “non-binding but not inconsequential” ruling included that all states have obligations under international human rights law to respect and ensure the effective enjoyment of human rights by taking necessary measures to protect the climate system and other parts of the environment.
She further noted that the ICJ’s opinion “established climate obligations and consequences for inaction or harmful action”.
This included that “the legal consequences resulting from the commission of an internationally wrongful act may include; a) cessation of the wrongful actions or omissions, if they are continuing; b) providing assurances and guarantees of non-repetition of wrongful actions or omissions, if circumstances so require; and c) full reparation to injured states in the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction”.
“Importantly, the ICJ further noted that while climate change is caused by cumulative greenhouse gas emissions, it is scientifically possible to determine each state’s total contribution to global emissions, taking into account both historical and current emissions,” Dukharan said.
“Each injured state may separately invoke the responsibility of every state which has committed an internationally wrongful act resulting in damage to the climate system and other parts of the environment.
“The fact that the damage may be the result of concurrent causes is not sufficient to exempt a state from any obligation to make reparations.”
