A Small But Important Step

While no advisory opinion can solve the climate crisis, the ITLOS decision does provide an important push for action, both globally and at the national level. It cleared the way for the ICJ’s forthcoming opinion on climate change, demonstrating how a clear and solid line of arguments can be developed. Although the ICJ may decide differently due to variations in the questions posed and treaties interpreted, it is unlikely to diverge significantly from the ITLOS narrative or reject its findings on related topics.

27. Mai 2024

, , , , ,

Harmonization Pains but Stakeholders‹ Gain

The Article 13 EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is home of the meaningful engagement provision. It is significantly more robust than similar provisions in national due diligence legislation in France, Germany and Norway. Despite the fact that a number of differences between EU CSDDD and these national laws is likely to give rise to some “harmonization pains”, one silver lining exists: stakeholders gain some leverage.

25. Mai 2024

,

The ITLOS Advisory Opinion and Marine Geoengineering

The ITLOS advisory opinion does little to resolve the long-standing uncertainty regarding the legal status of marine geoengineering activities. On the contrary, the opinion raises more questions than it answers. ITLOS seems content to leave those questions to others. Indeed, in the advisory opinion, ITLOS noted that “marine geoengineering has been the subject of discussions and regulations in various fora,” including the London Convention and Protocol. But after nearly twenty years, the regulatory framework for marine geoengineering adopted by the parties to the London Convention and Protocol is still not, strictly speaking, legally binding. Perhaps the advisory opinion will spur the parties into action.

25. Mai 2024

, , , , , ,

Unboxing the New EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive

There is a lot to unpack in the now final text of the Directive. The German Institute for Human Rights offers initial analysis in this blog symposium, which starts with this contribution. The contributions engage with the final text of the Directive and give some initial guidance for interpretation and transposition requirements. Topics covered include a critical reflection on the neo-colonial context of the the law-making process, access to justice and administrative supervision measures for rightsholders, the scope of human and environmental rights that are covered by the Directive as well as the transposition phase with comparative analysis in the context of existing national due diligence legislation, its extraterritorial reach and the involvement of National Human Rights Institutions.

24. Mai 2024

,

Unlocking UNCLOS

By advancing a more holistic vision of climate-relevant international law—one that seeks to harmonise but also allow for complementary interaction amongst the obligations set under different regimes—the ITLOS advisory opinion offers hope. It holds out the promise of a synergistic international legal response to climate change that better maps to the integrated and interconnected nature the ecosystems at stake and to the multi-pronged regulatory effort that will be needed to safeguard our climate system.

24. Mai 2024

, , , , ,

Elisabeth Selbert

Dr. Elisabeth Selbert, who took her A levels in self-study and completed her law degree in six semesters, did her doctorate – ahead of her time – on the principle of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. As a member of the Parliamentary Council, she was one of the four ‘mothers’ of the German Constitution. The inclusion of ‘Men and women shall have equal rights’ in Art. 3 (2) of the Basic Law (‘Grundgesetz’) is her merit. On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the ‘Grundgesetz’, this contribution aims to portray her life, achievements and impact in a short profile.

23. Mai 2024

, , , ,

The ITLOS Advisory Opinion on Climate Change

On May 21, 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) delivered a long-awaited Advisory Opinion on climate change and international law. This marks the first time that an international tribunal has issued an advisory opinion on State obligations regarding climate change mitigation. The Advisory Opinion addresses several key questions regarding application of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in the context of climate change. There is much to explore in terms of both the content of the ITLOS advisory opinion and its potential implications for global, regional, and local efforts to combat climate change. To facilitate discussion and the exchange of ideas, the Sabin Center's Climate Law Blog and Verfassungsblog are partnering on a blog symposium on the ITLOS opinion. In this first, introductory blog, we outline the background to the advisory opinion and highlight some of the key takeaways from it.

22. Mai 2024

, , , ,

What Does the European Court of Human Rights‹ First Climate Change Decision Mean for Climate Policy?

On 9 April the European Court of Human Rights issued its first ever comprehensive decision in a climate litigation case. The ECtHR has set out clear directions for member states to follow to align their climate policies with human rights obligations. Domestic legislators across Europe must give these requirements serious consideration to ensure their climate laws not only meet these minimum standards but also effectively contribute to global climate goals. This is imperative for both environmental sustainability and the protection of fundamental human rights that climate change is affecting.

15. Mai 2024

, , ,

Bertha Maria Júlia Lutz

Bertha Maria Júlia Lutz was an acknowledged scientist, a women’s rights activist, a politician, and a diplomat. Mostly known for being one of four women to sign the United Nations Charter in 1945 and assuring the inclusion of the rights of women in its preamble, she also played a vital role in attaining women’s suffrage in Brazil.

12. Mai 2024

, , ,

Reparation for Climate Change at the ECtHR

,

,

&

The recent rulings on climate change by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are—as others have pointed out in this blog symposium—both “historic and unprecedented” for various reasons, not least regarding the question of reparation for climate change-related harm. While redress is a pivotal question to think through in relation to climate change, it has, somewhat surprisingly, received less attention from scholars and has not yet been directly addressed by international courts and tribunals. In this regard, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland might be considered a missed opportunity on the part of the ECtHR.

10. Mai 2024

, , , ,