Gaza hunger crisis: 'The situation seems to be rapidly deteriorating'
23/07/2025
ICJ: World's top court to hand down watershed climate opinion
23/07/2025
France: Culture minister Rachida Dati to be tried on corruption charges
23/07/2025
Venezuela to investigate Bukele, other officials for alleged detainee abuse
23/07/2025
Restoring sea floor after mining may not be possible, researchers warn
23/07/2025
Russian delegation departs Moscow for Istanbul talks with Ukraine
23/07/2025
Black Sabbath frontman Ozzy Osbourne dies at 76
23/07/2025
More than 100 aid groups warn 'mass starvation' spreading across Gaza
22/07/2025
Brazil: Bolsonaro flashes ankle monitor as judge threatens imprisonment
22/07/2025
"Colbert stays, Trump must go": End of the Late Show shakes New York fans
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
9 hours ago
- France 24
Top court takes aim at fossil fuels in sweeping ruling
The International Court of Justice's first-ever advisory opinion on climate change contained a particularly strong position on fossil fuels that surprised even veteran observers of environmental law. The Hague-based court declared that states had an obligation under international law to address the "urgent and existential threat" of climate change, a decision hailed as a milestone by small islands most at risk. The unanimous decision went further than expected, with the court spelling out what responsibility states have to protect the climate from planet-warming emissions from burning fossil fuels. Failing to prevent this harm "including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies -- may constitute an internationally wrongful act" by that state, the court added. "It's really significant," said Sophie Marjanac, an international climate lawyer and director of legal strategy at the Polluter Pays Project, a campaign group. "It goes further than I expected, and it really makes some pretty groundbreaking findings," she told AFP. ICJ advisory opinions are not legally enforceable, but such opinions are rare, and seen as highly authoritative in steering national courts, legislation and corporate behaviour around the globe. Litigation against fossil fuel projects is growing, but so too are legal challenges by states and companies using the courts to block or unwind action on climate change. - Legal risks - Jorge Vinuales, who helped draft the request for the court's opinion, said the fossil fuels language in the final opinion "went as far as one could expect the court to go, which is no small feat". He said this interpretation of liability for climate harm would probably be picked up in domestic and global courtrooms. "If so, it could have far-reaching effects," Vinuales, a professor of law and environmental policy at the University of Cambridge, told AFP. Fossil fuel companies and oil- and gas-producing nations could ignore the ICJ "but that raises legal and litigations risks of its own", he added. Its opinion could be used in a lawsuit against expanding a coal mine, a private dispute between an investor and a state, or a contract negotiation involving a fossil fuel financier, said Marjanac. "It could come up in all sorts of ways, all over the place. The influence is unlimited, really," she said. This could particularly be the case in countries that can adopt international law directly into their constitutions and legal frameworks, though this would depend on national context and take time to trickle down. In these countries, which include France, Mexico, and the Netherlands, courts may have to take the ICJ opinion into account when hearing a case against an oil and gas venture. Even in so-called "dualist states" where international law is not automatically incorporated, constitutional courts and other national legislatures often respected and adopted aspects of ICJ opinion, experts said. The ruling "opens the door to challenges to new fossil fuel project approvals and licensing," said Marjanac, and "makes the operating environment much more difficult" for oil and gas majors. Line of defence The court also "provided stricter measures surrounding the business of fossil fuels" and underscored that governments could not avoid blame for polluting companies within their jurisdiction, said Joy Reyes from the London School of Economics. "Countries will have to be more circumspect when it comes to licensing permits and broader policies around fossil fuels, because it may open them up to liability in the future," Reyes, a climate litigation specialist, told AFP. It could also empower smaller states to pursue compensation from big polluters, and give countries threatened with legal action by fossil fuel companies a stronger line of defence. And it could be harder now for oil and gas companies "to claim they have a legitimate expectation to be able to operate a fossil fuel project without impediment," Lorenzo Cotula, an international legal expert, told AFP. "It's now clear that states have a legal duty to take action in this space, and if they're able to articulate this in possible proceedings, I think that will be a strong legal argument to make," said Cotula, from research institute IIED.
France 24
10 hours ago
- France 24
Zelensky approves new bill restoring 'independence' of anti-corruption bodies after protests
Protesters hold placards during a demonstration against a law that removes the independence of two key anti-corruption bodies in downtown Kyiv on July 23, 2025. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky approved draft legislation on Thursday that he said would restore the independence of the country's anti-corruption agencies, reversing course after an outburst of public criticism. Measures enacted earlier this week that established greater control by the prosecutor general, a political appointee, over the two bodies had fuelled rare wartime protests and had thrown Kyiv's EU bid into question. Zelensky said on X he had approved the draft for submission to parliament later in the day. To display this content from X (Twitter), you must enable advertisement tracking and audience measurement. Accept Manage my choices "It is important that we are maintaining unity. It is important that we are preserving independence. It is important that we respect the position of all Ukrainians," he said. Zelensky, whose image as a tireless leader of the three-year-old war against Russia's invasion has been tarnished by the controversy, said the text of the new bill is "well-balanced". He did not give further details, saying only that it "guarantees real strengthening of Ukraine's law enforcement system, independence of anti-corruption agencies, and reliable any Russian influence". Ukraine's Zelensky tries to limit backlash over law curbing anti-graft agencies To display this content from YouTube, you must enable advertisement tracking and audience measurement. Accept Manage my choices One of your browser extensions seems to be blocking the video player from loading. To watch this content, you may need to disable it on this site. Try again © France 24 04:49 On Monday, security forces arrested two anti-corruption officials on suspicion of ties to Russia and launched sweeping searches of other employees. Critics had decried the measures putting a Zelensky-appointed prosecutor in control over the anti-corruption agencies, saying they went too far and looked like political pressure against the agencies. Opposition lawmakers had collected enough signatures to register their own legislation to revoke the restrictive measures, which had been fast-tracked with help from Zelensky's ruling party. It was not immediately clear how soon parliament, which was meant to start its summer holiday this week, would consider either bill. The European officials expressed strong criticism over changes curbing the authority of the anti-corruption bodies and on Thursday welcomed an earlier pledge by Zelensky to retain their independence. (FRANCE 24 with Reuters)
France 24
10 hours ago
- France 24
Major economies welcome 'milestone' ICJ climate ruling
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Wednesday declared that states were obliged under international law to tackle climate change, and failing to do so could leave them open to being sued. The ICJ said climate change was an "urgent and existential threat" and countries had a legal duty to prevent harm from their planet-warming pollution. Countries breaching their climate obligations were committing a "wrongful act", the court said in its advisory opinion, which is not legally binding but carries political and legal weight. Campaigners and countries on the climate frontlines hailed the ruling as an important moment in the fight for accountability from big polluters most responsible for global warming. The German foreign ministry on Thursday said the ICJ's opinion confirmed that "climate protection is the duty of all states". It described the ruling as an "important milestone". The EU said the "important" decision "only confirms the immensity of the challenge we face and the importance of climate action and the Paris Agreement". "It also reaffirms the need of taking collective and ambitious action," Anna-Kaisa Itkonen, a spokeswoman for the European Commission, told journalists. China also welcomed the "positive" ruling. "The advisory opinion reflects the long-term positions and propositions of the vast majority of developing countries, including China, and has positive significance for maintaining and promoting international climate cooperation," said foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun. The British foreign ministry said it would take time to examine the advisory opinion before commenting in detail. "Tackling climate change is and will remain an urgent UK and global priority," the statement said. "Our position remains that this is best achieved through international commitment to the UN's existing climate treaties and mechanisms." The United States, which has embraced a fossil-fuel agenda under President Donald Trump, had on Wednesday given a muted response to the ruling. A US State Department spokesperson said it "will be reviewing the Court's advisory opinion in the coming days and weeks". © 2025 AFP
