Latest news with #CynthiaHouniuhi
Scoop
6 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Pacific Scholars Applaud International Ruling On Climate Change
Press Release – Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling that countries can be held legally accountable for greenhouse gas emissions has been welcomed by Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa – Centre for Pacific and Global Health. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling welcomed by Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa – Centre for Pacific and Global Health. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling that countries can be held legally accountable for greenhouse gas emissions has been welcomed by Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa – Centre for Pacific and Global Health. Co-Director Li'amanaia Dr Roannie Ng Shiu commended Pacific youth and Pacific communities for their leadership and perseverance over six years of advocacy. She says their leadership demonstrated the power of young Pacific voices to shape international systems and call the world to account. 'We extend our congratulations to the Pacific youth, student leaders and our Pacific communities in the region whose courageous advocacy and strategic vision led to this moment.' 'Their tireless efforts – supported by a coalition of Pacific governments, civil society, and legal experts – have resulted in a global legal affirmation that states have clear obligations to act on climate change.' The legal campaign, led by Vanuatu, was initiated by the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change (PISFCC). Its president, Cynthia Houniuhi, visited the University of Auckland's Fale Pasifika two years ago as a guest panelist for Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa's Pacific Transnational Leadership Panel, where she joined regional leaders in discussing the future of Pacific cooperation. Dr Ng Shiu praised the leadership of Houniuhi and the cultural integrity of the campaign. 'This opinion stems from a journey led by Pacific students and communities, speaking from lived experience – rising sea levels, disrupted ecosystems, and the health and social impacts already affecting their families.' That journey has now yielded a decision that will influence global climate action for years to come, says Ng Shiu. 'As a young Pacific female and student, she epitomizes what it means to make the impossible possible and to redefine leadership. She's quiet and humble, but when she speaks, it's deeply impactful. In a world that often celebrates loud and assertive voices, Cynthia's thoughtful approach stands out. 'Her leadership, and the way the ICJ campaign was conducted, reflects not just climate justice but also cultural ethics. The integration of storytelling and community engagement ensures that people hear, understand, and embrace the message. This is promising for Indigenous and Pacific peoples – our ways of knowing and being are being valued by institutions like the ICJ. 'This ruling is not just about empowerment, but also accountability. It sends a message to powerful nations that passing the buck is no longer acceptable.' Speaking from the Netherlands following the ICJ's advisory opinion, Cynthia Houniuhi responded with heartfelt emotion and pride, saying it marked a significant milestone in a youth-led campaign that began in the Pacific. 'This journey has been tough but deeply rewarding,' says Houniuhi. 'It's the relationships we've built along the way that have carried us. This victory belongs to all of us – especially those in rural communities who supported this work but couldn't be here to witness it.' Houniuhi emphasized the importance of communicating the technical decision in ways that resonate with local communities. 'We're committed to going back and speaking with our people – to show them that their hope was not misplaced.' Despite challenges, including the COVID-19 pandemic, the campaign adapted through digital platforms, maintaining momentum and building resilience. Houniuhi highlighted the courage and unity of Pacific youth and governments, and the importance of inclusive, community-driven advocacy. 'Our campaign has always been about collective effort. We walk toward a community goal, not individual recognition. That's our strength.' Emphasizing a collective approach over an individual focus, saw the campaign maintain ancestral storytelling traditions. 'In our advocacy, we used different aspects of our traditions as well as culture, even appearing in the courtroom using the power of wearing our own traditional attire.' She says they had to obtain permission from their chiefs in order to share their sacred stories in court submissions, ensuring cultural protocols were respected. Looking ahead, Houniuhi is seeking greater Pacific representation in international spaces such as COP and the UN General Assembly, and urges more Pacific lawyers, academics, and advocates to engage with the ICJ opinion. 'We need more Pacific voices telling our stories – not others speaking on our behalf. This is our advice, our opinion, and our future.' As the movement enters its next phase, Houniuhi's own journey continues – she hopes to pursue PhD studies at the University of Auckland, further strengthening the Pacific voice in global climate discourse. 'Barriers have already been broken. Round two – let's go.'
Scoop
6 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Pacific Scholars Applaud International Ruling On Climate Change
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling welcomed by Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa - Centre for Pacific and Global Health. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling that countries can be held legally accountable for greenhouse gas emissions has been welcomed by Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa - Centre for Pacific and Global Health. Co-Director Li'amanaia Dr Roannie Ng Shiu commended Pacific youth and Pacific communities for their leadership and perseverance over six years of advocacy. She says their leadership demonstrated the power of young Pacific voices to shape international systems and call the world to account. 'We extend our congratulations to the Pacific youth, student leaders and our Pacific communities in the region whose courageous advocacy and strategic vision led to this moment.' 'Their tireless efforts - supported by a coalition of Pacific governments, civil society, and legal experts - have resulted in a global legal affirmation that states have clear obligations to act on climate change." The legal campaign, led by Vanuatu, was initiated by the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change (PISFCC). Its president, Cynthia Houniuhi, visited the University of Auckland's Fale Pasifika two years ago as a guest panelist for Te Poutoko Ora a Kiwa's Pacific Transnational Leadership Panel, where she joined regional leaders in discussing the future of Pacific cooperation. Dr Ng Shiu praised the leadership of Houniuhi and the cultural integrity of the campaign. 'This opinion stems from a journey led by Pacific students and communities, speaking from lived experience - rising sea levels, disrupted ecosystems, and the health and social impacts already affecting their families." That journey has now yielded a decision that will influence global climate action for years to come, says Ng Shiu. "As a young Pacific female and student, she epitomizes what it means to make the impossible possible and to redefine leadership. She's quiet and humble, but when she speaks, it's deeply impactful. In a world that often celebrates loud and assertive voices, Cynthia's thoughtful approach stands out. 'Her leadership, and the way the ICJ campaign was conducted, reflects not just climate justice but also cultural ethics. The integration of storytelling and community engagement ensures that people hear, understand, and embrace the message. This is promising for Indigenous and Pacific peoples - our ways of knowing and being are being valued by institutions like the ICJ. 'This ruling is not just about empowerment, but also accountability. It sends a message to powerful nations that passing the buck is no longer acceptable." Speaking from the Netherlands following the ICJ's advisory opinion, Cynthia Houniuhi responded with heartfelt emotion and pride, saying it marked a significant milestone in a youth-led campaign that began in the Pacific. 'This journey has been tough but deeply rewarding,' says Houniuhi. 'It's the relationships we've built along the way that have carried us. This victory belongs to all of us - especially those in rural communities who supported this work but couldn't be here to witness it.' Houniuhi emphasized the importance of communicating the technical decision in ways that resonate with local communities. 'We're committed to going back and speaking with our people - to show them that their hope was not misplaced.' Despite challenges, including the COVID-19 pandemic, the campaign adapted through digital platforms, maintaining momentum and building resilience. Houniuhi highlighted the courage and unity of Pacific youth and governments, and the importance of inclusive, community-driven advocacy. 'Our campaign has always been about collective effort. We walk toward a community goal, not individual recognition. That's our strength.' Emphasizing a collective approach over an individual focus, saw the campaign maintain ancestral storytelling traditions. 'In our advocacy, we used different aspects of our traditions as well as culture, even appearing in the courtroom using the power of wearing our own traditional attire.' She says they had to obtain permission from their chiefs in order to share their sacred stories in court submissions, ensuring cultural protocols were respected. Looking ahead, Houniuhi is seeking greater Pacific representation in international spaces such as COP and the UN General Assembly, and urges more Pacific lawyers, academics, and advocates to engage with the ICJ opinion. 'We need more Pacific voices telling our stories - not others speaking on our behalf. This is our advice, our opinion, and our future.' As the movement enters its next phase, Houniuhi's own journey continues - she hopes to pursue PhD studies at the University of Auckland, further strengthening the Pacific voice in global climate discourse. 'Barriers have already been broken. Round two - let's go.'
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘We were heard': the Pacific students who took their climate fight to the ICJ
'I'm so nervous about today … it's going to be OK. Let's pray.' Those were the quiet but powerful words of Cynthia Houniuhi on Wednesday morning, just before the international court of justice (ICJ) handed down its historic advisory opinion on climate change at the Peace palace in The Hague. In the packed courtroom, thousands of kilometres from home, tension hung in the air. For Houniuhi – one of the original 27 Pacific law students who sparked the global legal campaign that led to the ruling – the moment was overwhelming. As the judges began to speak, she became teary. Years of hard work and late nights had come down to this. 'I was literally hanging on to each and every word the judge was saying. I was anticipating, waiting for the things I hoped to hear. The more I listened, the more emotional I became,' Houniuhi said. 'When the judges stated that states' obligations are not limited to the Paris agreement or the climate regime but also extend to environmental law, human rights law and international customary law, I cried right there in the courtroom.' The ICJ's advisory opinion for the first time gives the Pacific and all vulnerable communities a legal mechanism to hold states accountable and to demand the climate action long overdue. In the landmark opinion published on Wednesday, the court said countries must prevent harm to the climate system and that failing to do so could result in their having to pay compensation and make other forms of restitution. It says states are liable for all kinds of activities that harm the climate, but it takes explicit aim at fossil fuels. For a young Pacific woman at the forefront of this global fight, this win wasn't just political, it was personal. And it was history. 'We were there. And we were heard,' she said. The group of students all hailed from Pacific island countries that are among the most vulnerable in the world to the climate crisis. They came up with the idea of changing international law by getting the world's highest court to issue an advisory opinion on the climate crisis. The campaign was led by the nation of Vanuatu, a Pacific state of about 300,000 people that sits at the forefront of the climate crisis and has been ranked by the United Nations as the country most prone to natural disasters. Sitting beside Houniuhi was Vishal Prasad, executive director of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change (PISFCC), quietly taking it all in. 'I'm still trying to process everything,' Vishal said on Thursday. 'Cynthia was beside me, and our Pacific team was there. Line by line, paragraph by paragraph, I was amazed. From the obligations of states under the Paris agreement to the recognition of human rights and the right to a clean, healthy environment – and then to hear the court speak so strongly on fossil fuels – it was incredible.' The Ni-Vanuatu anthropologist and minister for climate change, Ralph Regenvanu, remembered when those same students first approached him for support in 2019. 'Back then I never imagined it would grow this big. It felt like a wild dream – this idea that we could go to the ICJ. But we thought, 'Why not?' There was youthful ambition and energy, and surprisingly – with support from across the world – we got here. Especially thanks to the international youth climate justice movement.' But it wasn't easy. Over the years, the movement faced resistance from major emitting countries. The Pacific had to go back, gather more evidence, more testimonies – and keep pushing, despite the odds. Siosiua Veikune, a youth climate advocate from Tonga and PISFCC member, said the group's cautious optimism about the case gave way to overwhelming gratefulness when the ruling was handed down. 'At first, we were skeptical. History has shown that courts sometimes speak to some issues but leave others out. But this ruling … it was bold. It was clear.' 'As a young Tongan, I hope we've helped set a healthy legal standard – a blueprint that can be replicated globally. This duty of care … it goes beyond legal obligations. It speaks to who we are in the Pacific.' The opinion didn't just recognise states' climate responsibilities – it tied them directly to human rights and the lives of frontline communities. Many in the Pacific and those who have been following the advisory opinion, including those who contributed to oral submissions, cheered with joy when the advisory opinion came down. Rufino Varea, director of the Pacific Islands Climate Network, said the court had handed Pacific people 'legal backbone for climate justice'. 'No more excuses. Those who fuel this crisis must stop the harm and help repair it,' he said. 'The law now reflects the justice our communities have always demanded – and we will use this opinion everywhere we fight for our people.' Pacific feminist climate activist Tamani Rarama said the ruling offered new tools in the fight for accountability. 'Now we have clarified, more nuanced international legal advice – a pathway for justice, redress and repatriation for the loss and damage our frontline communities have endured for years.' From scientific submissions provided by the Pacific Community to testimonies gathered by PISFCC in the Witness Stand for Climate Justice, every part of the case was anchored in the experiences of Pacific people. Dr Coral Pasisi, the Pacific Community's director of climate change, reflected on what the ruling means to her personally. 'My children told me before I left: there better be a decent outcome. Especially my 10-year-old son, who said, 'Mum, you've been doing this for 13 years, and the adults still aren't listening. Maybe you need to bring the kids to the table.' 'What this advisory opinion does is bring that next generation into the heart of climate discourse. It's a recognition of intergenerational responsibility. And we cannot have that conversation without bringing our children into it in a meaningful way.' As the Pacific celebrate, PISFCC and Pacific leaders are already discussing how to use the ruling in upcoming negotiations – especially in the lead-up to Cop30 in Brazil and working out what it means to the Pacific. For Houniuhi and the students who began it all, the work is far from over. 'This is a victory forged by Pacific youth but owned by all,' she said. 'We pushed the world's highest court to listen – and it did. Now we move from legal words to living change. Young people will make sure this ruling cannot be shelved or spun.' As for how she'll celebrate, she plans to wait until she gets home. 'It still feels surreal. Some of the people I want to celebrate with are back home. So, for now, I'm holding back the celebration – just feeling deeply grateful.'
BBC News
23-07-2025
- General
- BBC News
'Whether you win or lose, some fights are worth fighting': The largest ever climate case's unlikely origins
In 2019, a group of Pacific Island students took a classroom idea on climate change and turned it into a massive global operation. It all began with a bold student idea. Cynthia Houniuhi speaks fondly about her childhood growing up in one of the remoter parts of the Solomon Islands. Her earliest memories are of wading through warm seas to get to school, trapping wild birds with her older brothers, and sowing sweet potatoes and cassava. "I love planting vegetables, although I'm not really a fan of eating my vegetables," she laughs. "I can eat fruit all day." It was only later that Houniuhi realised something was amiss. She recalls a particular trip to Fanalei, the island her father is from, where she was shocked to see houses standing deep in salt water. She learned that some families had been forced to move. It was the beginning of an awareness of climate change that would shape the next years of Houniuhi's life. It would also help bring the largest ever climate case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), sometimes known as the UN world court. The ICJ, which is based in the Netherlands, is today due to give its advisory opinion on states' legal obligations to tackle climate change under international law, and lay out the consequences of breaching them. It's the largest case the court has ever considered – but it began with the spark of an idea in a university lecture theatre. Even a decade ago, most people in Houniuhi's community had no technical terms for what was happening to them, she says, "just observations" of climate impacts on their daily lives. There is a growing body of evidence that rising seas and intensifying storms, exacerbated by climate change, are displacing coastal communities on the Solomon Islands and other low-lying Pacific island states. "The only reason I made those connections was because I kept asking," Houniuhi says. She asked lots of questions of her family and neighbours: Was it always like this? How fast have things changed? Where are all the fish? "The value that was instilled in me, the curiosity that was always there from an early age, really pushed me on to ask more," she says. Motivated by a sense of justice and unafraid to speak up, Houniuhi decided to study law at the University of the South Pacific, in Fiji. In 2019, during her third year, lecturer Justin Rose tasked Houniuhi's class with the extracurricular task of promoting climate justice. One of the practical ideas they considered was seeking an advisory opinion from the ICJ, a formal document setting out the court's view on a particular topic. Other major courts – such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights – have also been asked for such opinions, which are politically influential and set the framework for future legal action. Most recently, the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights has been asked for its opinion, and has just begun the process. Houniuhi was hesitant at first, thinking the idea of approaching the ICJ was far too ambitious for a small group of students from the Pacific region. But she felt a sense of responsibility as part of a community on the frontlines of climate change and knew this was a problem that had to be tackled on a global scale. "What is the use of learning all this knowledge if it's not for our people to fight the single greatest threat to their security?" she asked herself. "This was an opportunity to do something bigger than ourselves, bigger than our fears." Houniuhi was one of 27 students to form an organisation called Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change (PISFCC), and soon agreed to be its president. The group petitioned teachers and lecturers about the idea, and crowdfunded 80 Fijian dollars (£26/ $35) to pay for its first banner. The timing was right, recalls Rose. A previous attempt to garner an advisory opinion from the ICJ by Palau and the Marshall Islands failed due to a lack of political support. But Houniuhi and her peers rode high on the global wave of youth climate activism begun by Greta Thunberg, and Rose was sure he could count on the support of Ralph Regenvanu, then Vanuatu's minister of foreign affairs and trade. Regenvanu was already an outspoken advocate for climate justice, who had threatened to sue fossil fuel companies and states. Regenvanu was on board. With Vanuatu taking the diplomatic helm, PISFCC campaigned relentlessly over the next few years alongside a growing network of young activists across Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas. PISFCC members, especially a few of the most dedicated, traipsed through the corridors of power with posters and pitches at climate meetings around the world. They gradually gathered pledges of support from Pacific and Caribbean nations and then further afield. Rose was supportive, encouraging PISFCC to keep true to its youth roots to remain grounded and to be able to tell an authentic story. Having followed the ups and downs of environmental politics for years, he says he was inwardly sceptical. But the group "just kept forging ahead", he says. The bet paid off. By March 2023, 132 countries had agreed to co-sponsor a resolution to go before the UN General Assembly. Later that month the body unanimously called on the ICJ to provide its opinion on two key questions: what obligations do states have to tackle climate change under international law and what are the legal consequences if they fail to do so? At the time PISFCC called it an "unprecedented step towards fighting the climate crisis". Its urgency was immediately apparent; Vanuatu was in a national state of emergency caused by two devastating tropical cyclones in 2023. This was far from the end of the road for the young activists. The court now asked for states to set out their written views on the key questions. PISFCC realised the advisory opinion would only be as good as the quality of submissions received, but they were not allowed to participate directly. Together with peers at World's Youth for Climate Justice, they undertook intensive lobbying under the slogan: "We're bringing the world's biggest problem to the world's highest court". They developed a handbook with legal experts to guide states in compiling their submissions, encouraged governments with fewer resources and less experience with the ICJ to get involved, and even managed to get into some Pacific island drafting rooms to discuss key topics affecting frontline communities. In November 2024, the ICJ finally announced it would advance to the next step – holding a public hearing where states could present their views orally to the court. The young activists mobilised again, raising awareness of what could have been an obscure legal process and encouraging people to attend in person or through virtual "watch parties". Battling visa problems and on a shoestring budget, a group of campaigners arrived in The Hague, the Netherlands, in early December to be greeted by drizzle. Before the hearing began, they held an opening ceremony that set the stage for the hearing through song and dance, bringing the warmth of the Pacific to the Netherlands. PISFCC had a slot on the first day of the hearing. The group worked together on their speech and Houniuhi was the obvious person to present it. It was a heavy burden and she says she felt nervous going into the court alongside veterans of international law and a forbidding panel of 15 senior judges from across the ICJ's jurisdiction. But thinking of her beloved nieces and nephews and seeing the excited youth team gave her courage. She had also been granted permission from Solomon Island chiefs to share their sacred knowledge, and knew that this was a special honour. "I am privileged enough to have an education that got me into this," Houniuhi recalls thinking to herself. "I have the opportunity right here." On the day, only her parents noticed that she could barely remember her own name. "The Pacific people really were my support system at that time. And they showed up in colours as well," she says, noting the array of traditional clothing that was on display in the room. Houniuhi herself wore her family's rorodara, a headdress encrusted with tiny shellsonly worn on special occasions. As her moment to speak came, Houniuhi suddenly felt the power shift. Stepping up to a podium in the middle of the room, she told the court how her people's land of Fanalei was on the verge of being completely engulfed by the rising seas. "Without our land, our bodies and memories are severed from the fundamental relationships that define who we are," she said. Over the next two weeks, just shy of 100 states gave oral statements to the court, alongside the World Health Organization, the International Union for Conservation of Nature and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), and other groups. Most states argued that a wide range of international law applied to climate change, including treaties and customary rules on due diligence, the duty to cooperate and the prevention of transboundary harm, as well as the right to self-determination. Human rights are being harmed, they argued, including those of children and future generations. Speaking on behalf of a group of Melanesian nations – which include Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu – all vulnerable to rising seas and temperatures, Regenvanu (now Vanuatu's special envoy for climate change), pointed the blame squarely at "a handful of readily identifiable states". These nations had produced the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions but stood to lose the least from their impacts, Regenvanu said. That "handful" hit back. Australia, the US, the UK, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, China and Russia maintained that any legal responsibility was limited exclusively to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement agreed under it in 2015. Many denied that human rights had any bearing on the questions at stake. Houniuhi says she found it hard to hear these arguments. "Being in the room… is different from seeing them on paper." Far from being an abstract problem deep in the future, representatives of nations across the Pacific and Caribbean, Africa, South America and Asia described the physical, economic and cultural impacts that climate change is already having on their people: deaths in the choking heat, poorer crops of staple foods of huge local significance such as yam and coconut, graveyards being washed away, forced relocations and livelihoods under threat. This group of nations appealed for climate justice to the ICJ, arguing that the states that have done the most damage do not just have a moral responsibility to those that have done the least, but a legal one. Many called for financial reparations to address it. (Read more about what the world would look like if polluters paid for climate damages). The court's decision builds on the opinions of the two other international courts. The first was the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea, which stated in 2024 that greenhouse gases are pollutants that are wrecking the marine environment. Second, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights concluded in July that there is a human right to a healthy climate that states have a duty to protect. The ICJ's opinion is not binding, but it will likely be used to back up climate lawsuits and as diplomatic fuel during international negotiations – particularly at COP30 in Brazil in November. However, the process of collecting statements and hearing state submissions has been important in and of itself. Joie Chowdhury is a senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, a non-profit which supported PISFCC and helped write daily legal briefings during the December hearing. She says the process led to unprecedented collaboration and built legal capacity among states not previously used to the ICJ. "The law creates the stage to build power, to build alliances, to bring alignment, and there can be great power in that." It also gave vulnerable communities an opportunity to tell their stories and was a way of explaining the injustice of climate change to a wider audience. Houniuhi stresses that most people on the Solomon Islands, particularly in rural areas, are struggling to make ends meet. So while climate change is threatening their economic, social and cultural rights, they did not have the luxury of following a highly technical process unfolding in a court 15,000 miles (24,140km) away. But the conversations that she and others had as a result of the ICJ process have helped raise awareness of what is happening and why. "The language has changed," she says. "The campaigners were thinking about the law in a way that really shifts how it is usually practiced," says Chowdhury. "They have been talking about ways of building movements rooted in the Pacific, identity and solidarity, and justice." Despite expressing a weariness at the reality of climate politics, Rose still supports the campaign. "There's lots of people offering you hope," he tells the young activists. "What you'll get from me is that, whether you win or lose, some fights are worth fighting." More like this:• What if polluters footed the climate bill?• The world's largest environmental restoration plan• Five nature wins that have actually worked Houniuhi too remains a "stubborn optimist" about it all. She has started teaching at the same law school where she studied five years ago, and plans to step down as president of PISFCC, handing it over to another young person to lead the organisation into its next phase. But she always knew this would be a role for life. She says the group dynamics are grounded in trust and always focused on the bigger picture. It's a message that comes time and again from the young people involved, who stress how collaborative the task has been. "I'm not going to lie – there are times when someone accidentally dropped a laptop and there was a whole lot of looking for funding to buy a new one," says Houniuhi. "But most of the members have held my hand so many times. The nature of the work you're dealing with means sharing your personal stories. This made us realise we need to be the support for each other." PISFCC is tussling with its next steps, trying to work out how it can ensure the advisory opinion makes a difference in the real world while remaining a youth-driven organisation. Whatever happens, this network of passionate activism and friendship that has grown around the campaign in the Pacific Islands is likely to remain. -- Update: This article was updated on 23 July 2025 to add that the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights has also been asked for an advisory opinion on climate change, in addition to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. -- For essential climate news and hopeful developments to your inbox, sign up to the Future Earth newsletter, while The Essential List delivers a handpicked selection of features and insights twice a week. For more science, technology, environment and health stories from the BBC, follow us on Facebook, X and Instagram.
The Advertiser
22-07-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
History in making as World Court to advise on climate
For the first time, the world's highest court will offer advice on the world's biggest problem. It's a punchy slogan that has been wielded successfully by young campaigners to build global momentum behind a landmark international climate case first conceived by a group of Pacific-based law students. While not legally binding, Wednesday's long-awaited "advisory opinion" from the International Court of Justice will clarify the responsibility of nations to prevent climate harm and redress damage inflicted from spewing out greenhouse gases. Cynthia Houniuhi, one of the 27 law students from a Vanuatu university who hatched the idea to seek legal opinion from the World Court, has experienced first-hand the impacts of climate change on her Solomon Islands homelands. The president of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change remembers returning to her father's home on Fanalei Island, where she observed a very different landscape than she had on previous visits. Fewer houses, no children playing soccer on the sand and posts sticking out of the ocean, leftover from buildings otherwise consumed by the sea. Pacific Island nations are particularly vulnerable to rising global temperatures. Fiercer storms and cyclones are wreaking havoc, sea-level rise is threatening low-lying coastal villages, and weakened marine ecosystems are posing challenges for communities that rely on the ocean for food and income. Rich countries are not immune, but small islands and low-lying developing countries' contribution to the problem has been far less, despite having to bear more of the costs and having fewer resources to adapt. It's this injustice that has climate-vulnerable states pushing hard for faster emissions cuts as well as compensation for the loss and damage they have done little to create. Ms Houniuhi is not expecting the World Court's advisory opinion to solve the climate crisis but says clarity around state obligations to act would make the law a stronger tool for holding governments to account. She imagines a favourable result informing domestic climate legal activity, such as the case recently led by two Torres Strait Islanders, Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai. Australia's Federal Court ultimately rejected the case, determining the Commonwealth did not have a duty of care to protect their Torres Strait homelands from the impacts of climate change. "The response from one of the uncles, it broke my heart," Ms Houniuhi tells AAP. Getting the world's highest court to deliver an advisory opinion was no simple task for the global network of young climate campaigners, with a majority vote at the United Nations General Assembly required for it to proceed. Vanuatu, a climate change-vulnerable South Pacific island nation of roughly 335,000, was the first to take up the cause. From there, momentum built until a coalition of 132 nations unanimously adopted a resolution in 2023 to refer the case to the World Court. Vanuatu's Minister for Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, says such a display of state solidarity is significant and unlikely to be repeated ever again. Mr Regenvanu, the first government official to listen to the young activists, is "very hopeful" for a strong outcome at the Peace Palace following favourable results in similar climate cases put to other top courts. A good outcome, in his view, will clearly state that states have obligations under international law to prevent climate harm and to redress harm that's been done, as well as consequences for failing to act. "There's a readily identifiable group of states who are the main offenders," he tells AAP. "They're the ones who are going to bear the consequence of not fulfilling what, we hope, will be their legal duty to prevent climate harm." The landmark case concludes ahead of the next round of international climate talks in November and Mr Regenvanu expects to use the advisory opinion to influence negotiations at the summit in Brazil. Australia is still bidding to co-host the 2026 event alongside the Pacific and while Mr Regenvanu says the region's leaders remain committed, he was critical of some of the bigger nations' recent actions. "Particularly the continuing rollout of new fossil fuel projects for the export market," he says. University of Melbourne environmental law expert Jacqueline Peel says the World Court's stance on the science of climate change will be carefully watched. "Particularly in the current context, where we have countries like the United States, for example, taking a very hostile view on climate science," she tells AAP. Australia was among the 132 nations that co-sponsored the request for a World Court opinion but its submission took a "fairly narrow view" of its international obligations, centred around those already spelled out in the Paris Agreement. Professor Peel says the advantage of Paris for big-emitting countries is that emission reduction targets and pacing are set by the nations themselves, rather than being subject to some broader international standard. "Pacific countries would prefer that it's a broader approach that really emphasises the urgency of tackling the problems," she says. For the first time, the world's highest court will offer advice on the world's biggest problem. It's a punchy slogan that has been wielded successfully by young campaigners to build global momentum behind a landmark international climate case first conceived by a group of Pacific-based law students. While not legally binding, Wednesday's long-awaited "advisory opinion" from the International Court of Justice will clarify the responsibility of nations to prevent climate harm and redress damage inflicted from spewing out greenhouse gases. Cynthia Houniuhi, one of the 27 law students from a Vanuatu university who hatched the idea to seek legal opinion from the World Court, has experienced first-hand the impacts of climate change on her Solomon Islands homelands. The president of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change remembers returning to her father's home on Fanalei Island, where she observed a very different landscape than she had on previous visits. Fewer houses, no children playing soccer on the sand and posts sticking out of the ocean, leftover from buildings otherwise consumed by the sea. Pacific Island nations are particularly vulnerable to rising global temperatures. Fiercer storms and cyclones are wreaking havoc, sea-level rise is threatening low-lying coastal villages, and weakened marine ecosystems are posing challenges for communities that rely on the ocean for food and income. Rich countries are not immune, but small islands and low-lying developing countries' contribution to the problem has been far less, despite having to bear more of the costs and having fewer resources to adapt. It's this injustice that has climate-vulnerable states pushing hard for faster emissions cuts as well as compensation for the loss and damage they have done little to create. Ms Houniuhi is not expecting the World Court's advisory opinion to solve the climate crisis but says clarity around state obligations to act would make the law a stronger tool for holding governments to account. She imagines a favourable result informing domestic climate legal activity, such as the case recently led by two Torres Strait Islanders, Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai. Australia's Federal Court ultimately rejected the case, determining the Commonwealth did not have a duty of care to protect their Torres Strait homelands from the impacts of climate change. "The response from one of the uncles, it broke my heart," Ms Houniuhi tells AAP. Getting the world's highest court to deliver an advisory opinion was no simple task for the global network of young climate campaigners, with a majority vote at the United Nations General Assembly required for it to proceed. Vanuatu, a climate change-vulnerable South Pacific island nation of roughly 335,000, was the first to take up the cause. From there, momentum built until a coalition of 132 nations unanimously adopted a resolution in 2023 to refer the case to the World Court. Vanuatu's Minister for Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, says such a display of state solidarity is significant and unlikely to be repeated ever again. Mr Regenvanu, the first government official to listen to the young activists, is "very hopeful" for a strong outcome at the Peace Palace following favourable results in similar climate cases put to other top courts. A good outcome, in his view, will clearly state that states have obligations under international law to prevent climate harm and to redress harm that's been done, as well as consequences for failing to act. "There's a readily identifiable group of states who are the main offenders," he tells AAP. "They're the ones who are going to bear the consequence of not fulfilling what, we hope, will be their legal duty to prevent climate harm." The landmark case concludes ahead of the next round of international climate talks in November and Mr Regenvanu expects to use the advisory opinion to influence negotiations at the summit in Brazil. Australia is still bidding to co-host the 2026 event alongside the Pacific and while Mr Regenvanu says the region's leaders remain committed, he was critical of some of the bigger nations' recent actions. "Particularly the continuing rollout of new fossil fuel projects for the export market," he says. University of Melbourne environmental law expert Jacqueline Peel says the World Court's stance on the science of climate change will be carefully watched. "Particularly in the current context, where we have countries like the United States, for example, taking a very hostile view on climate science," she tells AAP. Australia was among the 132 nations that co-sponsored the request for a World Court opinion but its submission took a "fairly narrow view" of its international obligations, centred around those already spelled out in the Paris Agreement. Professor Peel says the advantage of Paris for big-emitting countries is that emission reduction targets and pacing are set by the nations themselves, rather than being subject to some broader international standard. "Pacific countries would prefer that it's a broader approach that really emphasises the urgency of tackling the problems," she says. For the first time, the world's highest court will offer advice on the world's biggest problem. It's a punchy slogan that has been wielded successfully by young campaigners to build global momentum behind a landmark international climate case first conceived by a group of Pacific-based law students. While not legally binding, Wednesday's long-awaited "advisory opinion" from the International Court of Justice will clarify the responsibility of nations to prevent climate harm and redress damage inflicted from spewing out greenhouse gases. Cynthia Houniuhi, one of the 27 law students from a Vanuatu university who hatched the idea to seek legal opinion from the World Court, has experienced first-hand the impacts of climate change on her Solomon Islands homelands. The president of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change remembers returning to her father's home on Fanalei Island, where she observed a very different landscape than she had on previous visits. Fewer houses, no children playing soccer on the sand and posts sticking out of the ocean, leftover from buildings otherwise consumed by the sea. Pacific Island nations are particularly vulnerable to rising global temperatures. Fiercer storms and cyclones are wreaking havoc, sea-level rise is threatening low-lying coastal villages, and weakened marine ecosystems are posing challenges for communities that rely on the ocean for food and income. Rich countries are not immune, but small islands and low-lying developing countries' contribution to the problem has been far less, despite having to bear more of the costs and having fewer resources to adapt. It's this injustice that has climate-vulnerable states pushing hard for faster emissions cuts as well as compensation for the loss and damage they have done little to create. Ms Houniuhi is not expecting the World Court's advisory opinion to solve the climate crisis but says clarity around state obligations to act would make the law a stronger tool for holding governments to account. She imagines a favourable result informing domestic climate legal activity, such as the case recently led by two Torres Strait Islanders, Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai. Australia's Federal Court ultimately rejected the case, determining the Commonwealth did not have a duty of care to protect their Torres Strait homelands from the impacts of climate change. "The response from one of the uncles, it broke my heart," Ms Houniuhi tells AAP. Getting the world's highest court to deliver an advisory opinion was no simple task for the global network of young climate campaigners, with a majority vote at the United Nations General Assembly required for it to proceed. Vanuatu, a climate change-vulnerable South Pacific island nation of roughly 335,000, was the first to take up the cause. From there, momentum built until a coalition of 132 nations unanimously adopted a resolution in 2023 to refer the case to the World Court. Vanuatu's Minister for Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, says such a display of state solidarity is significant and unlikely to be repeated ever again. Mr Regenvanu, the first government official to listen to the young activists, is "very hopeful" for a strong outcome at the Peace Palace following favourable results in similar climate cases put to other top courts. A good outcome, in his view, will clearly state that states have obligations under international law to prevent climate harm and to redress harm that's been done, as well as consequences for failing to act. "There's a readily identifiable group of states who are the main offenders," he tells AAP. "They're the ones who are going to bear the consequence of not fulfilling what, we hope, will be their legal duty to prevent climate harm." The landmark case concludes ahead of the next round of international climate talks in November and Mr Regenvanu expects to use the advisory opinion to influence negotiations at the summit in Brazil. Australia is still bidding to co-host the 2026 event alongside the Pacific and while Mr Regenvanu says the region's leaders remain committed, he was critical of some of the bigger nations' recent actions. "Particularly the continuing rollout of new fossil fuel projects for the export market," he says. University of Melbourne environmental law expert Jacqueline Peel says the World Court's stance on the science of climate change will be carefully watched. "Particularly in the current context, where we have countries like the United States, for example, taking a very hostile view on climate science," she tells AAP. Australia was among the 132 nations that co-sponsored the request for a World Court opinion but its submission took a "fairly narrow view" of its international obligations, centred around those already spelled out in the Paris Agreement. Professor Peel says the advantage of Paris for big-emitting countries is that emission reduction targets and pacing are set by the nations themselves, rather than being subject to some broader international standard. "Pacific countries would prefer that it's a broader approach that really emphasises the urgency of tackling the problems," she says. For the first time, the world's highest court will offer advice on the world's biggest problem. It's a punchy slogan that has been wielded successfully by young campaigners to build global momentum behind a landmark international climate case first conceived by a group of Pacific-based law students. While not legally binding, Wednesday's long-awaited "advisory opinion" from the International Court of Justice will clarify the responsibility of nations to prevent climate harm and redress damage inflicted from spewing out greenhouse gases. Cynthia Houniuhi, one of the 27 law students from a Vanuatu university who hatched the idea to seek legal opinion from the World Court, has experienced first-hand the impacts of climate change on her Solomon Islands homelands. The president of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change remembers returning to her father's home on Fanalei Island, where she observed a very different landscape than she had on previous visits. Fewer houses, no children playing soccer on the sand and posts sticking out of the ocean, leftover from buildings otherwise consumed by the sea. Pacific Island nations are particularly vulnerable to rising global temperatures. Fiercer storms and cyclones are wreaking havoc, sea-level rise is threatening low-lying coastal villages, and weakened marine ecosystems are posing challenges for communities that rely on the ocean for food and income. Rich countries are not immune, but small islands and low-lying developing countries' contribution to the problem has been far less, despite having to bear more of the costs and having fewer resources to adapt. It's this injustice that has climate-vulnerable states pushing hard for faster emissions cuts as well as compensation for the loss and damage they have done little to create. Ms Houniuhi is not expecting the World Court's advisory opinion to solve the climate crisis but says clarity around state obligations to act would make the law a stronger tool for holding governments to account. She imagines a favourable result informing domestic climate legal activity, such as the case recently led by two Torres Strait Islanders, Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai. Australia's Federal Court ultimately rejected the case, determining the Commonwealth did not have a duty of care to protect their Torres Strait homelands from the impacts of climate change. "The response from one of the uncles, it broke my heart," Ms Houniuhi tells AAP. Getting the world's highest court to deliver an advisory opinion was no simple task for the global network of young climate campaigners, with a majority vote at the United Nations General Assembly required for it to proceed. Vanuatu, a climate change-vulnerable South Pacific island nation of roughly 335,000, was the first to take up the cause. From there, momentum built until a coalition of 132 nations unanimously adopted a resolution in 2023 to refer the case to the World Court. Vanuatu's Minister for Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, says such a display of state solidarity is significant and unlikely to be repeated ever again. Mr Regenvanu, the first government official to listen to the young activists, is "very hopeful" for a strong outcome at the Peace Palace following favourable results in similar climate cases put to other top courts. A good outcome, in his view, will clearly state that states have obligations under international law to prevent climate harm and to redress harm that's been done, as well as consequences for failing to act. "There's a readily identifiable group of states who are the main offenders," he tells AAP. "They're the ones who are going to bear the consequence of not fulfilling what, we hope, will be their legal duty to prevent climate harm." The landmark case concludes ahead of the next round of international climate talks in November and Mr Regenvanu expects to use the advisory opinion to influence negotiations at the summit in Brazil. Australia is still bidding to co-host the 2026 event alongside the Pacific and while Mr Regenvanu says the region's leaders remain committed, he was critical of some of the bigger nations' recent actions. "Particularly the continuing rollout of new fossil fuel projects for the export market," he says. University of Melbourne environmental law expert Jacqueline Peel says the World Court's stance on the science of climate change will be carefully watched. "Particularly in the current context, where we have countries like the United States, for example, taking a very hostile view on climate science," she tells AAP. Australia was among the 132 nations that co-sponsored the request for a World Court opinion but its submission took a "fairly narrow view" of its international obligations, centred around those already spelled out in the Paris Agreement. Professor Peel says the advantage of Paris for big-emitting countries is that emission reduction targets and pacing are set by the nations themselves, rather than being subject to some broader international standard. "Pacific countries would prefer that it's a broader approach that really emphasises the urgency of tackling the problems," she says.
