Sinking nations are one step closer to ‘receiving justice’ for fossil fuel harms as the UN backs a historic climate ruling.
Defying efforts by the US to have it withdrawn, a landmark resolution on the legal obligations of countries to protect the planet from climate change has passed a critical next step.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday (20 May) to support strong action to limit climate change despite fierce campaigning against it by fossil fuel producing countries.
The 193-member world body approved a non-binding resolution endorsing the landmark advisory opinion by the UN’s top court last July that called failure by countries to protect the planet from climate change a violation of international law.
“The world’s highest court has spoken. Today, the General Assembly has answered,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres said in a statement. “This is a powerful affirmation of international law, climate justice, science, and the responsibility of states to protect people from the escalating climate crisis.”
The resolution not only reaffirms the International Court of Justice's ruling on the legal obligations of states on climate change, including reducing their climate harm and tackling fossil fuels, but also ensures there will be a process for advancing compliance with the ruling.
Which countries opposed the climate protection measure?
The vote was 141-8 with 28 abstentions. The US, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia – some of the highest oil-producing nations and major greenhouse gas emitters – opposed the measure. Climate change is caused mainly by the burning of coal, oil and gas.
The text includes adopting a national climate action plan to limit global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius; phasing out subsidies for fossil fuel exploration, production and exploitation; and urging those in violation to provide “full reparation” for damage.
The Paris climate agreement in 2015 set a goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C since pre-industrial times, or the mid-1800s, giving rise to the mantra “1.5 to stay alive”, but now scientists say even their best-case scenario still shoots past that signature temperature mark.
The UN resolution had initially included stronger language from the ICJ opinion that called for establishing an “International Register of Damage” to record evidence and claims, but it was removed after nearly a dozen consultations in order to receive more support.
The adoption came despite reporting in February that the Trump administration had been urging other nations to press the small island country of Vanuatu – the draft's original sponsor – to withdraw it from consideration.
In guidance issued to all US embassies and consulates, the State Department had said it “strongly objects” to the proposal and that its adoption “could pose a major threat to US industry”.
On Wednesday, Tammy Bruce, the deputy US ambassador to the UN, blasted the measure once again, calling it “highly problematic” and maintaining that Washington has serious legal and policy concerns despite changes to the draft.
“The resolution includes inappropriate political demands relating to fossil fuels and on other climate topics,” Bruce told the assembly before the vote.
Vanuatu: 'The harm is real and it is already here'
But representatives from Vanuatu and other island nations, who fear for their survival because of the impact of climate change, said it was important for the General Assembly to back the court opinion, which was hailed as a turning point in international climate law.
“We should be honest with one another about why this matters,” Odo Tevi, the Vanuatu ambassador to the UN, said before the vote. “It matters because the harm is real and it is already here, along our islands and coastlines, for communities facing drought and failed harvests.”
He added, “The states and peoples bearing the heaviest burden are very often those who contributed least to the problem.”
The action by the world body follows decades of frustration for Pacific nations that are watching their homelands disappear.
In Tuvalu, where the average elevation is just two metres above sea level, more than a third of the population has applied for a climate migration visa to Australia, although only a limited number are accepted each year. By 2100, much of the country is projected to be underwater at high tide.
In Nauru, the government has begun selling passports to wealthy foreigners – offering visa-free access to dozens of countries – in a bid to generate revenue for possible relocation efforts.
Fenton Lutunatabua, Pacific and Caribbean Lead at climate campaign group 350.org, said the vote brought communities “closer to receiving justice for the suffering the fossil fuel industry has caused, and the havoc wreaked upon our shorelines as we pay with our lives and our pockets to rebuild after yet another cyclone, yet another flood.”
Louis Charbonneau, UN director of Human Rights Watch, said in a statement on Wednesday that by endorsing the court ruling, the UN “reaffirmed the global commitment to protect human rights”. He noted that it came “despite efforts by the US and other oil-producing states to stifle attempts to combat climate change.”
