“The Tribunal for the Law of the Sea recognizes, as already done by other international bodies, that climate change and its causes represent a threat to human rights, as they compromise the health of the environment in which we live and our right to Health”. And with a “historical pronouncement” it gives “further confirmation to the body of legal and scientific evidence which places the responsibility of States to combat pollution at the centre”. Thus the lawyers of Consulcesi, a network committed to defending the right to health and a healthy environment through the collective action Aria Pulita, comment on the first advisory opinion received from the independent UN body on climate matters, which “It constitutes an important legal precedent”, explains Bruno Borin, head of the Consulcesi legal team.
The advisory opinion of the Itlos (International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) – reports a note – comes in response to questions raised by a group of small island states on the obligations of governments to protect the marine environment from climate change, starting from pollution caused by greenhouse gases. According to what was reported by the Commission of the Smaller Island States on Climate Change (Cosis), which was responsible for carrying out the technical-scientific checks in the locations covered by the opinion, the island countries are threatened by rising sea levels and other effects of climate change, of which greenhouse gas air pollution is one of the causes. These smaller states – we read – contribute only about 1% to the climate crisis, but suffer the most serious effects. Therefore, concludes Cosis representing them, it is necessary for the richest countries and those with high levels of pollution to take responsibility for their historical and ongoing contribution to climate change.
The court was asked to express its opinion considering in particular three questions: do greenhouse gas emissions qualify as marine pollution? What are the obligations of States to prevent and reduce such pollution? What are the obligations to protect and preserve the oceans from the impacts of climate change? In its ruling – the note reports – the international tribunal concluded that greenhouse gas emissions constitute a form of marine pollution, and that therefore the signatory states of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) have “the obligation specific” to adopt “all necessary measures to prevent, reduce and control marine pollution resulting from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions”. To achieve these objectives, “countries must therefore align their climate policies and base themselves on the most recent scientific knowledge. Not only that”, underlines Borin: “The court reiterates that, in the absence of certain data, states must apply the precautionary principle provided for by international law”.
In its ruling – Consulcesi further highlights – the court underlines the need to pursue the objectives established in the Paris Agreement, in particular the objective of keeping the increase in global temperature within +1.5°C within the defined timescales. Adding however that, “even if a State respects the commitments of the agreement – Borin points out – it does not automatically mean that it has satisfied its legal obligations under the Unclos. The latter are in fact distinct, although related, legal requirements relating to the climate crisis” .
“Although the advisory opinion is not legally binding – concludes Borin – as other experts also hypothesize, it could and indeed should significantly influence future decisions on climate issues”. The ruling, concludes Consulcesi’s lawyer, “confirms that the issue of air pollution can no longer be relegated to the concept of concrete damage to the individual, but as more and more analyzes show there are a series of indirect consequences, in the short and long term term, which must be considered and prevented”.
#Consulcesi #Sea #Law #Tribunal #enforcement #actions #States
