Inter-American Court Says States Must Protect People From Climate Change
The decision means that around 20 countries across Latin America and the Caribbean that recognize the court's jurisdiction must undertake legal reforms that could increase the requirements imposed on businesses, something environmentists have long advocated.
"States must adopt all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising... from the degradation of the global climate system," the Costa Rica-based court said in response to a request submitted by Colombia and Chile.
It underlined that "the right to a healthy environment" is included among the rights protected by the American Convention on Human Rights.
The court is an autonomous legal institution that interprets and applies the American Convention, which has been ratified by more than 20 countries including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Peru.
The court said countries must "adopt legislative and other measures to prevent human rights violations committed by state and private companies."
"States must urge all companies domiciled or operating in their territory to adopt effective measures to combat climate change and its impacts on human rights," it said.
The first government reaction to the decision came not from one of the OAS member states, but from the small Pacific island of Vanuatu, which hailed it as "groundbreaking."
The ruling was also welcomed by environmentalists.
The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), which was involved in the case, said such "advisory opinions" were "authoritative statements of binding international law and carry substantial legal weight."
"The court has broken new ground and set a powerful precedent," said Nikki Reisch, the organization's climate and energy program director.
"The court's conclusions should put big polluters, like the fossil fuel industry, on notice: climate-destructive conduct violates the law."
Viviana Krsticevic, executive director of the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), said the ruling established "legally binding standards" for the protection of the right to a healthy environment.
Marcella Ribeiro, an attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, said that it was the first time an international court had "directly addressed climate change as a legal and structural human rights issue."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
8 hours ago
- DW
Fleeing, injured, and forgotten in Poland's border forest – DW – 07/05/2025
For four years now, Poland has taken drastic measures to stop refugees from entering the EU across its border with Belarus. The humanitarian consequences are dire. DW spent a day with the activists who try to help them. Aleksandra Chrzanowska stops for a moment, checks her location on her cell phone, then marches straight into the forest, following no signpost or path. She walks confidently, despite the marshy, uneven ground. The Bialowieza National Park is Europe's last remaining primeval forest. Since 2021, Chrzanowska, a member of the Warsaw-based human rights organization Association for Legal Intervention, has spent almost every day in the forest on the Polish-Belarusian border. That was when Belarus started to encourage people from third countries to cross into Poland, as a way of exerting pressure on the EU. Poland responded by erecting a border fence and sending people back to Belarus. Since then, the situation at the border has deteriorated into a full-blown humanitarian crisis. Chrzanowska points to a map on her phone. It is dotted with colored markers. Each represents an "intervention," as the activists from the network Grupa Granica call their humanitarian activities in the forest along the border with Belarus. Usually, this means bringing hot soup, water, clothes, shoes, and power banks for the refugees. In many instances, they also provide medical assistance, and they get support from a doctor if the case is serious. Since the five-meter-high border fence was erected along the border with Belarus, there has been a sharp increase in injuries like broken bones, and deep cuts from barbed wire. "The fence doesn't stop people," Chrzanowska says. "They have no choice. Their lives are in danger in their homelands." Last year, Grupa Granica received around 5,600 emergency calls. They were able to intervene in response to about 1,400, helping some 3,400 people. The stranded migrants came from countries like Syria, Eritrea, Sudan, Somalia, and Afghanistan. The same year, the Polish border police recorded around 30,000 attempts to cross the border illegally. That number continues to increase: Frontex reported that in 2024 the number of people taking the so-called eastern migration route through Belarus went up by around 200%. Today, Aleksandra Chrzanowska is on her way to a designated spot to collect items left behind after an earlier intervention. Grupa Granica can sometimes reuse them, but the important thing is that they don't want any litter left in this unique nature reserve. Chrzanowska dons disposable gloves, picks up a thermos, a torn jacket, and a child's shoe, and puts them in a rubbish bag. Her phone rings. The base camp is calling. Reception is poor: Chrzanowska curses, but she's got the gist. Two Afghan men have just sent a text to the international emergency number, asking for help. "We have to hurry," she says. Suddenly she's like a different person. She grabs the rubbish bag, and as we stride toward the base camp, she listens to voice messages giving details of the upcoming intervention. One of the men has deep cuts, the messages say. The Afghan refugees have also asked for dry clothes and shoes, as they're soaked to the skin. They've sent a photo of the wound, which will be forwarded to a doctor for consultation. Meanwhile, at the base camp, other volunteers are packing the things the men need into big rucksacks. A short time later, Chrzanowska and another activist set off along a path, before plunging off into the depths of the forest, for reasons of security. They meet up with the refugees at the marked location they sent them earlier. Chrzanowska reports that the men were well hidden; it took them a while to find them. The men, in their mid-20s, speak no English. The activists use translation apps on their phones, typing in questions that the app translates into Pashtu. How long have they been in the forest? The men type in: a few weeks, three days on the Polish side. It's their third attempt; they've been pushed back twice before. This means that the Polish border guards have already caught them twice, and sent them back to Belarus, even though the men are seeking asylum. On March 27 this year, Poland suspended the right to apply for asylum at the Belarusian border. The men haven't eaten or drunk anything for several days. They gratefully accept the chickpea soup, sweet tea, and drinking water the activists have brought them. While they fortify themselves, Chrzanowska exchanges text messages with the doctor. The wound on the man's foot is deeper than it looked on the photo. The doctor sends Chrzanowska instructions for cleaning and treating the cut. The man types into the phone that he got the injury jumping from the border fence. The migrants were accompanied to the border by armed Belarusian soldiers, who were very aggressive, and hit them, he writes. The soldiers propped a ladder against the five-meter-high steel barrier, and forced the Afghans to jump down on the other side. "Normally, we would call an ambulance, to get the wound properly treated," says Chrzanowska. But since the suspension of asylum procedures, this is too risky, because "then border guards come as well. And that means there's a very high risk that the refugees will be sent back to Belarus again, regardless of the injury." The intervention lasts about half an hour. Chrzanowska tries to clean the wound as best she can. When she gets back from the intervention, she reports that the man was lying on the forest floor, very weak and in a lot of pain. "I was worried that he might not even be able to walk anymore," she says. Once he had eaten and drunk something, though, he soon stabilized. For Aleksandra Chrzanowska, this moment is always very moving. "At first, the refugees are very frightened. Once they're in dry clothes, and have had some hot tea or soup, you see them become human again." Some then even insist on sharing the food with her. The Grupa Granica network consists of several local NGOs and aid initiatives, and is supported by hundreds of volunteers, along with a small number of full-time helpers. Other than Doctors Without Borders, no international NGOs are active at the border between Poland and Belarus — unlike at other external EU borders. The Polish government disapproves of the work the activists are doing, and criminalizes the provision of support to migrants. Right now, five activists are on trial in the eastern Polish town of Hajnowka for helping an Iraqi Kurdish family with seven children who were hiding in the forest. They sare accused of "facilitating the stay" of illegal immigrants for "personal benefit." Aleksandra Chrzanowska is not intimidated. "Helping people is legal," she says curtly. Just a few hours later, they receive another emergency call. A group of four Afghans is asking for help. One reports that he has broken his leg jumping from the border fence. This time, a doctor will go with them.
Int'l Business Times
a day ago
- Int'l Business Times
US Readies New Tariffs While July 4 Costs Surge For Families And Firms
As Americans fire up their grills and gather for fireworks this Independence Day, a new economic flashpoint looms: a fresh wave of tariffs that could take effect in less than a month. With official notifications expected to go out as early as July 5, concerns are mounting over how the rising cost of imports may impact small businesses and everyday consumers. The tariff strategy—announced by former President Donald Trump—is expected to impose levies ranging from 10% to 70% on goods from countries without existing bilateral trade deals. These measures could be implemented by Aug. 1, according to CBS News. The move marks the expiration of a 90-day pause following April's unilateral tariff threats. Fireworks Industry Feels the Fuse Burning For an industry synonymous with July 4, the fireworks business is in a bind. Roughly 95% of consumer fireworks are imported from China, and importers say recent tariff policy changes have created serious disruptions in supply and pricing. "We're seeing costs that have doubled in some categories over the last three years," said Julie Heckman, executive director of the American Pyrotechnics Association, in an interview with CBS News. Retailers are reporting higher costs per container, which have not fully stabilized since earlier tariff rounds that peaked at 145%. As reported by Business Insider, wholesalers like Indiana-based distributor Bob Hamilton said he secured extra inventory early, but warns that "margins are being eaten alive" by unpredictable import costs. The Cookout Crunch: Families Paying More for Fourth of July Basics This year's holiday cookouts are also costing more. According to Axios, the average cost of July 4 cookout staples—like beef, buns, soda, and condiments—has jumped 12.7% year-over-year. Items like hamburger meat and ice cream are among the steepest climbers, as import-linked ingredients and packaging materials face cost pressure. An Axios/Ipsos poll found 32% of Americans are opting for cheaper food options—like pizza or store-brand hot dogs—rather than hosting traditional barbecues. Economist Natalie Ortega of the National Retail Federation told Axios the inflation isn't isolated: "It's not just food—it's grills, folding chairs, decorations. Tariffs are driving up the cost of celebration." Small Businesses Caught in the Middle For small businesses, especially those relying on international supply chains, the pressure is mounting. According to a recent CBS MoneyWatch report, more than 30% of small firms say they've raised prices due to tariff-related costs, while others fear closure if current trade uncertainty continues. Shayai Lucero, owner of Earth & Sky Floral Designs in New Mexico, described her struggle to keep costs manageable. "Roses that used to cost under a dollar are now close to $2.50," she told CBS News. "We can't eat those costs forever." Trade groups have echoed these concerns. In comments cited by Financial Times, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce warned that business sentiment could weaken further if tariff escalation continues without diplomatic resolution. A Political Playbook or Economic Gamble? While the administration frames the move as reclaiming "economic independence," analysts are skeptical. Julia Sutherland, a policy analyst at the Brookings Institution, told CBS News that "tariffs are regressive taxes. They hit working families long before they touch corporations." Further analysis from Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan suggests the U.S. tariff burden is climbing toward 13%—levels not seen since the pre-WWII Smoot-Hawley era. Experts caution this could raise consumer prices into Q3 and chill capital expenditure among small manufacturers. What to Watch Next July 5: Official tariff letters expected to go out to U.S. trade partners. July 9: Deadline for the 90-day tariff pause to expire. August 1: Full implementation of new tariffs anticipated. Global reactions could follow. India has floated WTO action, while the EU and China are weighing possible retaliatory tariffs. Meanwhile, U.S. families are adjusting to holiday inflation. As noted by AP News, even sales of essentials like soft drinks and paper goods have dipped in lower-income households, which are disproportionately affected by price volatility. Final Thought While July 4 remains a day to celebrate American independence, 2025's edition offers a deeper reflection: What does economic independence mean when it comes at a rising cost to small businesses and families? As the country watches fireworks, many on Main Street are watching price tags—and wondering what the rest of the summer will bring.
DW
2 days ago
- DW
Why is Iran doubling down on its nuclear program? – DW – 07/04/2025
Tehran seems defiant on its nuclear ambitions despite the recent war. The nuclear program, launched with US help during the Shah era, was always a show of strength. Now, it also symbolizes the regime's resilience. Tehran is officially halting its collaboration with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in the wake of the recent US and Israeli air strikes. "As long as the security of Iranian nuclear facilities is not ensured, Iran will suspend its cooperation with the IAEA," parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said on state television last week, with President Masoud Pezeshkian signing off on the move this Wednesday. The specifics of the measure, however, remain unclear. For example, it is not yet known how it would affect the IAEA inspectors that remained in Iran throughout the 12-day conflict. The Vienna-based UN agency hopes to gain more information on the state of the three of Iran's top nuclear facilities — in Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz — which were targeted by the US-Israeli bombing. It also unclear if Iran is willing to remain in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the cornerstone of global arms control, after its facilities were attacked. "The fact that these facilities were attacked while under (IAEA) safeguards, while there is no evidence that they were being used for weaponization, is stirring the debate in Iran about whether the NPT still provides security value," Kelsey Davenport, the Director for Nonproliferation Policy at the Arms Control Association think tank, told DW. Ahead of the Israeli strikes on Iraq, the IAEA warned that Iran was the only nation without nuclear arms that is enriching uranium at nearly weapons-grade levels and that it had enough material for several nuclear bombs. At the same time, however, the IAEA stressed it did not have "any proof of a systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Tehran's nuclear program has a long and complicated history going back to the 1950s and Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The US-backed monarch decided to join an initiative launched by US President Dwight Eisenhower known as "Atoms for Peace" which aimed to give other nations — especially the developing ones — access to civilian nuclear technology. Iran took advantage of the offer to build the foundations of its own nuclear program. Tehran also joined the IAEA in 1958, just a year after the UN agency was founded in Vienna. The nuclear program was seen as a prestige project in Iran. The country wanted to boost its production of electricity and eventually produce its own nuclear fuel independently of foreign suppliers while also reducing the consumption of oil and gas. In 1970, Iran signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which allows for civilian use of nuclear energy under the IAEA supervision. The Islamist Revolution of 1979 left Iran in chaos. The US stopped its deliveries of nuclear fuel to the research reactor in Tehran. In 1980, Iraq attacked Iran to take control of its oil fields, sparking an eight-year war. Western companies, including German ones, abandoned their cooperation with the Iran nuclear program. In the early 1980s, rumors began circulating that Iraq was building a nuclear weapon. Israel, who regarded the Saddam Hussein regime as more of a threat than the Iranian mullahs, actually used information provided by the Iranian secret services to bomb Iraq's nuclear reactor Osirak in 1981. After the Iran-Iraq war ended in 1988, Iran started importing technology from Pakistan, China and Russia to enrich uranium and develop its own nuclear fuel. The regime hoped to prove that Iran was capable of pursuing high-tech projects, and its nuclear program became a symbol of the nation's strength. Iranian officials never denied the fact that Tehran also had the capacity to build a nuclear weapon in case of an emergency. Akbar Etemad, the man known as the father of Iran's nuclear program, believed that no country has the right to dictate how other nations pursue its nuclear policy, and he maintained that position even after the Islamist Revolution in 1979. Fereydoun Abbasi, who led Iran's atomic agency until he was killed in recent Israeli air strikes, also publicly stated that Iran needed to be able to quickly reach weapons-grade levels of enrichment if the government demands it. In 2003, IAEA inspectors and satellite surveillance indicated the possibility of Iran pursuing a secret military nuclear program. Germany's foreign minister at the time, Joschka Fischer, convinced his counterparts in the UK and France to start negotiations with Iran, aiming to impose stricter controls of the Iranian nuclear program with the help of the IAEA. After 12 long years of talks, the US, China, Russia and the three European powers came to a comprehensive nuclear agreement with Iran knowns the JCPOA. In 2018, however, the US President Donald Trump took his country out of the agreement to get a "better deal." Iran responded by gradually forgoing its commitments and began high-level uranium enrichment in 2019. Today, Iran has about 400 kilograms (over 880 pounds) of highly enriched uranium and many advanced centrifuges used to process the radioactive element. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Despite the US claiming that Iran's nuclear program has been "obliterated," many experts warn that Iran could rebuild its nuclear facilities. "At the end of the day there are some really important things that haven't been hit," Jeffrey Lewis, a non-proliferation expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in Monterey, California, told the US broadcaster NPR. Right now, Iran is very unlikely to compromise, said Iranian-born reporter Mehrdad Farahmand. "Iran sees backing down in a wartime situation as weakness" and this perception is possibly the biggest obstacle to a revival of diplomacy, he said. Looking to the future, Iran's perspective is likely to be shaped by the examples of Libya and North Korea, according to Kelsey Davenport. "It wouldn't be surprising if the advisors around the supreme leader are arguing that Iran needs nuclear weapons to defend itself from further attack," she said. "Iran looks at the example of Libya, where Moammar Gadhafi gave up the country's nuclear weapons program, returned to good standing in NPT, and then later was overthrown by Western-backed forces," Davenport told DW. In turn, North Korean abandoned the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003, developed its nuclear weapons, and the regime — now lead by Kim Jong Un — remains firmly in power. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
