David Rossati

And bye, bye blended learning...

Climate Change, Sea-Level Rise, and Cultural Rights: The Case of Bonaire On the 28th of January, the District Court of the Hague rendered its judgment in the case of Greenpeace v. the Netherlands. The case addressed the Dutch State’s mitigation and adaptation obligations t...

Flore Heinrich and I have co-authored a blog on @ejiltalk.bsky.social on the recent judgment in the Bonaire case, focusing on how the District Court of The Hague approached cultural rights in the context of climate change and implications for future litigation: www.ejiltalk.org/climate-chan....

🚨The most important graph in the world has another year of data, and it doesn't look good!🚨

NASA CERES satellites measure how much sunlight Earth absorbs and how much heat is radiated back to space.

The difference is heat accumulation, which has more than tripled!

The implications of overshooting 1.5 °C on Earth system tipping elements—a review The implications of overshooting 1.5 °C on Earth system tipping elements—a review, Ritchie, Paul D L, Steinert, Norman J, Abrams, Jesse F, Alkhayuon, Hassan, Arnscheidt, Constantin W, Bochow, Nils, Chapman, Ruth R, Clarke, Joseph, Dennis, Donovan P, Donges, Jonathan F, Flores, Bernardo M, Garbe, Julius, Högner, Annika, Huntingford, Chris, Lenton, Timothy M, Lohmann, Johannes, Lux-Gottschalk, Kerstin, Milkoreit, Manjana, Möller, Tessa, Pearce-Kelly, Paul, Pereira, Laura, Quinn, Courtney, Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich, Stuenzi, Simone M, Swingedouw, Didier, Van der Laan, Larissa N, Zickfeld, Kirsten, Wunderling, Nico

Review of how “minimising the magnitude and duration” of overshooting 1.5C could decrease the risk of surpassing climate tipping points

#climatecrisis
HT @carbonbrief.org
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1...

⚡ ⚖️ 🌐 #𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐋𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐮𝐩𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞: hearings continue at 🧑‍⚖️ Paris Judicial Court in landmark case against 🛢️TotalEnergies
🔍 Focus today: expert hearings & civil liability
🧵 Live coverage in English below 👇
🇫🇷 See also live coverage in French via @notreaffaireatous.bsky.social

States can withdraw from the BoP at any time. However, the one billion US dollars that some of them might have paid to secure a permanent spot will stay! In the words of the inaugural Chairman, this sounds really like a ‘bad deal’ for states! 10/10

Now, what would happen if, say, a member of the EB, most loyal to the ‘inaugural’ Chairman, vetoes such a decision even in a case of evident incapacity? The BoP would be simply blocked, unless amendments to its text are passed. But these require the confirmation of the (incapable) Chairman! 9/10

Finally, the BoP text refers to the supervened incapacity of the Chairman, and I think for good reasons. However, a statement of incapacity can only happen via the unanimous vote of the Executive Board, which is itself nominated by the Chairman and made up of ‘leaders of global stature’. 8/10

... and stands in stark contrast to the calls for a return to sovereignty and nationalism by some of the governments of participating Member States. 7/10

This leaves open the possibility for the ‘inaugural’ Chairman to nominate private subjects, including family members. Having an organ made of a single, private individual with a veto over sovereign Member States is something unseen... 6/10

Second, there are issues with the succession of the Chairman. The 'inaugural' Chairman (Trump) 'shall at all times designate a successor' (which is itself a vague formulation). There are no requirements for the successor to be a Head of State, Head of Government, or Member State's official. 5/10

The consequences are that the BoP might enter into void agreements, not be covered under applicable customary international law, and other Member States and IOs might refuse to engage with the BoP as if it were an actual IO. 4/10

The Charter of the Board of Peace: A Dubious Legal Personality and a Regressive Peacebuilding Mandate Unbound by Law [Sanmay Moitra is a research assistant at ‘Human Rights in Practice’ and an Advanced LLM candidate at Leiden University. He has previously studied international law at the University of Oxford and …

However, as noted already by Sanmay Moitra, this element casts doubt over the actual nature of the BoP as an IO, given that there are strong arguments that it lacks an actual autonomous will. A necessary condition for IOs. 3/10 opiniojuris.org/2026/02/11/t...

First, the governance of the 'Board of Peace' centers on a 'Chairman' who can veto any decision made by its Member States. There is no formal plenary organ other than the 'Board of Peace' itself, working both as a 'container organ' and as an entity with international legal personality. 2/10

The legal design of the 'Board of Peace' is a primer in the history of international organizations law, and it's fraught with issues. From 'pay-to-play' seats to a 'Chairman for Life', here is why the BoP is a legal anomaly: 👇 #InternationalLaw #BoardofPeace 1/10

🌡️👋 With an average temp of 1.4°C above pre-industrial levels it is "increasingly likely" that the 1.5°C threshold of the Paris Agreement (as clarified by the ICJ) will be passed. This will have important repercussions at law.
🔥 Europe should adapt according to a pathway of 2.8°C-3.3°C warming
2/2

‘Daunting but doable’: Europe urged to prepare for 3C of global heating Advisory board member says adapting is ‘not rocket science’ but Europe already paying price for lack of preparation

The ESABCC's report on climate change adaptation is just out. Some statements that should 'sink in':
♨️Europe warmed up to 2.4°C on average over the last 5 years
... Estimated 16.000 deaths in Eu in 2025 for extreme heat linked to climate change
1/2
www.theguardian.com/environment/...

About the distinction between the 'rule-based order' and international law, see this piece by John Dugard: www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

I interpret that speech, basically saying that it's Canada's time to veer away from US' version of the rules, and to shape new ways of 'ordering' its international relations. This could even mean going back to actual international law among like-minded countries.

The 'rule-based order' has elements of international law, but several others are excluded/mutated: no judicial enforcement, no prohibition on the use of force, and self-defence on steroids, no clear sources of law etc. And, yes, there is selectivity in applying them.

Some might read Carney’s speech below as a “the king (international law) is naked” moment: but the “rules-based order” he refers to isn’t international law, but a US remaking of it, with the rest of the West often grudgingly following.

"the court failed to seriously engage with situations where anonymity is crucial — including for whistleblowers or people seeking information while fearing reprisals."

I am pleased to see so many signatories on this letter to Energy Secretary Ed Miliband about ISDS and climate change (I am one of the signatories). We need to be considering alternatives to ISDS to prevent foreign investors from challenging measures that address climate change.

🚨 BREAKING: EU countries have agreed to a weakened 2040 climate goal and have set a new target for COP30.

Read the story: www.politico.eu/article/eu-c...

Plastics Treaty talks are over. After 11 grueling days of delays, distractions, and gaslighting, we are leaving Geneva without a treaty. But countries stood firm against fossil-fueled interests — hope for an ambitious #PlasticsTreaty lives on.
🎥 @dlevialvares.bsky.social + @davzoul.bsky.social

"The absence of a substantial discussion on climate change and disaster in the Court’s Opinion is thus not a gap; it is a discursive shift" 🔥

Brazil files WTO request for consultation over US tariffs, source says Brazil's government has filed a request for consultations at the World Trade Organization over the tariffs imposed by the United States on goods from that country, a source familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.

Brazil files WTO request for consultation over US tariffs, source says reut.rs/45hoag8

ICYMI: My latest in Verfassungsblog, arguing that Germany's highest representatives failed miserably to discharge their constitutionally mandated obligation to uphold international lawby calling the use of force by Israel and the US against Iran out as what it was: clearly unlawful.

Bar chart showing heat-related deaths in several European cities from 23 June to 2 July 2025, distinguishing between numbers due to human-caused climate change and those due to natural variability Milan: 317 from human caused climate change, 182 natural Barcelona: 286, 54 Paris: 235, 138 London: 171, 92 Rome: 164, 118 Madrid: 108, (then some relatively small number not given) Athens: 96, 79 Budapest: 47, 24 Zagreb: 31, 25 Lisbon: 21, 71 Frankfurt: 21 (then some relatively small number not given) Added text says two-thirds of heat deaths in London were attributable to climate change Guardian graphic, source: World Weather Attribution, Grantham Institute, Imperial College London

Yes climate change is already killing people

www.imperial.ac.uk/grantham/pub...

Full statement: Global warming is projected to exceed 1.5°C within a few years, placing humanity in the danger zone where multiple climate tipping points pose catastrophic risks to billions of people. Already tropical coral reefs have crossed their tipping point and are experiencing unprecedented dieback, impairing the livelihoods of hundreds of millions who depend on them. Current warming has activated these irreversible changes and every fraction of additional warming dramatically increases the risk of triggering further damaging tipping...

The key takeaway from the Global Tipping Points Conference at @exeter.ac.uk, where I've been this week, convening over 500 earth-system & other scientists:

Global heating over 1.5C risks setting off tipping points that would destroy the world. The hotter, the more danger.

1/