The ICJ Advisory Opinion on Climate Change: A Business and Human Rights Perspective – Opinio Juris

 

Report on the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Climate Change: Implications for Corporate Responsibility and the Sustainable Development Goals

This report analyzes the July 2025 Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning state obligations on climate change. It focuses on the Opinion’s implications for human rights-based corporate responsibility, placing significant emphasis on its alignment with and impact on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production).

The ICJ Advisory Opinion: State Obligations for SDG 13 (Climate Action)

In response to a 2023 request from the UN General Assembly, the ICJ delivered a unanimous Advisory Opinion clarifying states’ international legal obligations to protect the climate system. The Court’s findings provide an authoritative legal foundation for advancing SDG 13 by defining the scope and content of state duties under international law.

Key Findings of the Court

• Urgent and Existential Threat: The Court characterized climate change as an “urgent and existential” threat, underscoring the critical need for immediate and effective measures consistent with the aims of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
• Duty of Due Diligence: The ICJ affirmed that states have a duty to exercise due diligence, using all means at their disposal to prevent activities within their jurisdiction or control from causing significant harm to the climate system.
• Broad Legal Basis: The Court rejected the lex specialis argument, confirming that state obligations are derived not only from climate treaties (UNFCCC, Paris Agreement) but also from a broader body of international law, including customary international law and human rights law.
• Internationally Wrongful Acts: A breach of these obligations could constitute an internationally wrongful act, engaging the international responsibility of the state. This reinforces the legal accountability mechanisms central to SDG 16.

The Erga Omnes Nature of Climate Obligations

Crucially, the Court determined that obligations to protect the climate system from anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are owed erga omnes. This finding strengthens the framework for global cooperation under SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) by establishing that all states possess a legal interest in ensuring compliance, empowering them to invoke the responsibility of states that fail to meet their climate obligations.

Human Rights, Corporate Responsibility, and the SDGs

The Opinion unequivocally links climate protection with human rights, creating a strong legal nexus between state duties, corporate conduct, and the achievement of multiple SDGs.

Integrating Human Rights and Climate Action (SDG 13 & SDG 16)

The ICJ affirmed that the adverse effects of climate change impair the enjoyment of a wide range of human rights, aligning with the principles of a just transition and the indivisibility of the SDGs. The rights identified as being at risk include:

1. The right to life
2. The right to health, directly impacting SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being)
3. The right to an adequate standard of living
4. The rights of women, children, and indigenous peoples, relevant to SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

This position aligns the ICJ with other international judicial bodies, such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) and the European Court of Human Rights, reinforcing a global legal consensus that climate action is a human rights imperative.

State Duty to Regulate Private Actors for Sustainable Development

The Opinion establishes a clear state obligation to regulate the conduct of private actors to achieve “deep, rapid, and sustained GHG emissions” reductions. This has profound implications for corporate accountability and the promotion of SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy).

• The ICJ clarified that a state’s failure to enact necessary legislative and regulatory measures to limit emissions from private actors under its jurisdiction constitutes an internationally wrongful act.
• The wrongful act is not the emission itself, but the state’s failure to regulate activities such as fossil fuel production, consumption, licensing, and subsidies.
• The joint declaration by Judges Bhandari and Cleveland further specified that state obligations include phasing out fossil fuel dependency, thereby directly supporting the transition envisioned in SDG 7.

Broader Implications for Global Sustainability Frameworks

The ICJ’s findings are poised to influence key international legal and policy instruments designed to advance corporate accountability and sustainable development.

Impact on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (SDG 12 & SDG 17)

The Opinion provides a new legal context for mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence legislation, such as the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). The ICJ’s clarification of state duties to regulate corporate conduct suggests that any weakening of corporate climate obligations, such as removing requirements for companies to implement credible climate transition plans, would risk diverging from states’ duties under international law to uphold SDG 13.

Influence on the UN Treaty on Business and Human Rights (SDG 16 & SDG 17)

The ongoing negotiations for a legally binding treaty on business and human rights will be significantly influenced by the Opinion. The current draft treaty’s limited reference to corporate climate responsibilities stands in contrast to the clear obligations articulated by the ICJ and the IACtHR. The Opinion strengthens the case for explicitly integrating corporate climate-related duties into the treaty, thereby creating a robust legal instrument to advance SDG 16 by ensuring access to justice and holding corporations accountable for their role in achieving the 2030 Agenda.

Conclusion: Advancing the 2030 Agenda through International Law

The ICJ Advisory Opinion represents a landmark development in international law, providing an authoritative interpretation of state obligations to address the climate crisis. By intrinsically linking climate protection to human rights and establishing a clear duty for states to regulate corporate emitters, the Opinion significantly strengthens the legal architecture supporting the Sustainable Development Goals.

While the Opinion highlights the structural limitations of judicial mechanisms in solving a planetary crisis, it provides a powerful tool for academics, practitioners, and civil society. Its legal reasoning will shape future litigation, policy development, and international negotiations, reinforcing the principle that achieving SDG 13 is a fundamental legal obligation and a prerequisite for the realization of the entire 2030 Agenda.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 13: Climate Action

• The article is fundamentally about climate change, which it describes as an “‘urgent and existential’ threat.” The entire discussion revolves around state obligations to protect the climate system, reduce anthropogenic Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, and align with international climate treaties like the Paris Agreement. The core issue is taking urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article extensively discusses the role of international legal institutions, particularly the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in defining and enforcing state obligations. It focuses on the “rule of law at the… international level,” the legal consequences for states that fail to meet their obligations, and the development of a “treaty on business and human rights.” This directly relates to building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

• The analysis is framed within the context of global cooperation and international agreements, such as the UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement. The article highlights the importance of these instruments and the UN General Assembly’s role in requesting the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion, demonstrating the multi-stakeholder partnerships needed to address global issues like climate change. It also discusses policy coherence between international climate law, human rights law, and business regulations.

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

• The article addresses corporate responsibility for climate harm, specifically mentioning the “outsized’ role of fossil fuels in driving anthropogenic emission.” It discusses state obligations to regulate private actors, including phasing out “fossil fuel dependency,” ending “fossil fuel subsidies,” and implementing corporate due diligence legislation like the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), which encourages companies to adopt sustainable practices and report on their impacts.

SDG 3, 5, and 11: Human Rights-Related Goals

• The article explicitly links climate change to human rights, stating that its adverse effects “may impair the effective enjoyment of a wide range of human rights.” It specifically names the rights to “life, health, an adequate standard of living, privacy, family and home, as well as the rights of women, children and indigenous peoples.” This connects the climate crisis to:
  • SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) through the right to health.
  • SDG 5 (Gender Equality) through the rights of women.
  • SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) through the rights to an adequate standard of living and home.

Identified SDG Targets

Targets under SDG 13 (Climate Action)

• Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning. The article supports this by referencing states’ obligations to prepare and implement “nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement” and the corporate requirement to adopt “credible climate transition plans” aligned with the 1.5°C target.

Targets under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

• Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all. The entire article, focusing on the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion and its interpretation of international law, is an analysis of this target in action. It clarifies legal obligations and consequences, strengthening the international rule of law.
• Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development. The discussion on states’ duty to regulate private actors and protect human rights from climate impacts is about enforcing policies for sustainable development.

Targets under SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production)

• Target 12.c: Rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption. The article directly mentions state obligations regarding “the provision of fossil fuel subsidies” and the need to “phase out fossil fuel dependency.”
• Target 12.6: Encourage companies, especially large and transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle. This is identified in the discussion of the EU’s CSDDD, which could “require companies to report on their climate-related human rights impacts and to adopt emission reduction plans.”

Targets under SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)

• Target 17.14: Enhance policy coherence for sustainable development. The article’s analysis of the interplay between international climate treaties, human rights law, and corporate due diligence legislation is a direct examination of the need for policy coherence.
• Target 17.16: Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships. The article mentions the UN General Assembly, the ICJ, the UNFCCC, and the Paris Agreement, all of which are central to the global partnership on climate change.

Implied or Mentioned Indicators

Indicators for SDG 13 (Climate Action)

• Indicator 13.2.1: Number of countries that have communicated or implemented nationally determined contributions (NDCs), long-term strategies, and national adaptation plans. The article explicitly refers to “nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement” and corporate “climate transition plans” as key instruments for state and corporate action.
• Indicator 13.2.2: Total greenhouse gas emissions per year. This is implied by the article’s central theme of achieving “deep, rapid, and sustained GHG emissions” reductions and its reference to the “substantial contribution of corporate actors to global emissions.”

Indicators for SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production)

• Indicator 12.c.1: Amount of fossil-fuel subsidies per unit of GDP. This is directly implied by the article’s reference to state obligations concerning “the provision of fossil fuel subsidies” and the need to phase them out.
• Indicator 12.6.1: Number of companies publishing sustainability reports. This is implied through the discussion of mandatory due diligence legislation like the CSDDD, which would “require companies to report on their climate-related human rights impacts.”

Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

SDGs	Targets	Indicators Identified in Article
SDG 13: Climate Action	13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.	13.2.1: Existence and implementation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and climate transition plans. 13.2.2: The need to reduce total Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.
SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels. 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.	The existence and interpretation of international legal instruments (e.g., ICJ Advisory Opinion, treaty on business and human rights) to define and enforce state obligations.
SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production	12.c: Rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies. 12.6: Encourage companies to adopt sustainable practices and integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle.	12.c.1: The amount of “fossil fuel subsidies” provided by states. 12.6.1: The number of companies required to report on climate impacts under legislation like the CSDDD.
SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals	17.14: Enhance policy coherence for sustainable development. 17.16: Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development.	The use of international agreements (Paris Agreement, UNFCCC) and institutions (UN, ICJ) to create a coherent legal framework for climate action.
SDG 3, 5, 11: Good Health, Gender Equality, Sustainable Communities	Protecting fundamental human rights from the impacts of climate change.	The impairment of rights to health (SDG 3), the rights of women (SDG 5), and the right to an adequate standard of living/home (SDG 11) due to climate change.

Source: opiniojuris.org