Historic climate change ruling from the International Court of Justice: what it means for Africa The International Court of Justice says governments are legally obliged “to achieve deep, rapid and sustained reductions” in greenhouse gas emissions.

Excited to share my article titled “Historic climate change ruling from the 23 July 2025 @CIJ_ICJ International Court of Justice: what it means for Africa” has just been published in The Conversation, Africa
🔗 theconversation.com/historic-cli...

In Game-Changing Climate Rollback, E.P.A. Aims to Kill a Bedrock Scientific Finding

Trump’s attempt to overturn the EPA’s endangerment finding is climate denial of the highest order. This move threatens one of the most important tools we have to protect people from climate pollution. www.nytimes.com/2025/07/29/c...

Today’s warning of an unfolding famine – one created entirely by Israel’s murderous siege – must finally rouse the international community to act with a clarity and resolve that has so far been beyond it. A quote by Bushra Khalidi, Oxfam's Policy lead in the Occupied Palestinian territory.

Gaza is suffering the worst stages of famine, the @theipcinfo.bsky.social warns today.

World leaders must break Israel's siege & allow humanitarian aid to enter - now.

Our reaction👇
www.oxfam.org/en/press-rel...

The full judgement - 140 pages - is here: www.icj-cij.org/sites/defaul....

That’s OK - Many official human rights treaty bodies say countries are responsible for their climate failures and the resulting impacts on people outside their borders. @oxfaminternational.bsky.social described them here: climatecasechart.com/wp-content/u...

11. Human rights treaties can apply to a State’s conduct that affects people outside their borders, if the text of the treaty provides for this. The Court doesn’t say which treaties apply.

10. People who have to seek safety in another country due to climate change cannot be returned where there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk of irreparable harm to the right to life (the principle of non-refoulement).

9. States do not lose their territorial rights due to sea level rise.

8. Climate finance can be litigated. The duty to cooperate is subject to a due diligence obligation. The Court says that a Court can review the adequacy of current financial and technology transfer commitments.

7. The Court recognizes that human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is essential for the enjoyment of other human rights. Implying this right is implicit under human rights treaties. There were strong arguments this was already the case, but the ICJ ends any argument.

6. States that fail in their duties to protect the climate can be required to provide reparation to affected countries based on the extent of their failure.

5. States can be held to account for their conduct that leads to emissions in other countries or their conduct that lets private parties off the hook.

4.The ICJ invites litigation against the wealthiest petro-states! It says fossil fuel production, consumption, granting of fossil fuel exploration licences or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies, where a State is not doing enough to protect the climate, may break international law.

And they must take human rights law into account in their climate measures.

3. Human rights law is clearly established as part of addressing the climate crisis. Countries must reduce emissions and help people adapt as part of their obligations under human rights law, especially the rights to life, health, and an adequate standard of living.

2. It’s a shot in the arm for climate litigation. The Court says countries cannot hide behind the Paris Agreement’s. They have “limited” discretion in preparing their national climate plans. The Court clearly rejects arguments by the US and other countries that said the opposite.

1. Countries (here's looking at you, USA) that pull out of the Paris Agreement, UNFCCC and other treaties: It’s a futile gesture – you’re still bound by international customary law, which has additional obligations.

The International Court of Justice climate judgement was – in many ways – better than expected. Here are 11 takeaways about what ICJ judgement and what it means for the protection of the climate:

International Court of Justice climate ruling a ‘powerful tool for holding countries to account’ — Oxfam The International Court of Justice has ruled that governments must phase out fossil fuels, rapidly reduce emissions, provide r

www.oxfamamerica.org/press/intern...

While the federal government falls short, U.S. states and cities must take the lead to align their policies with global climate obligations, defend people’s rights, and protect the health of their residents.

Leaving the Paris Agreement doesn’t erase that responsibility or make the crisis any less urgent.

The Trump administration’s attempts to shirk climate obligations violate international law. Today's
ICJ ruling makes clear that all countries, including the U.S., have a legal duty to cut emissions, provide support to other countries, and protect people from climate harm.

@oxfaminternational.bsky.social ICJ climate ruling a powerful tool to hold countries to account oxfam.org/node/25130 Proud to support young climate defenders who took their fight for justice from a classroom in Vanuatu to the world’s highest court. They won the world a tremendous victory today.

Floods are getting more dangerous around the country, not just in Texas North Carolina, New Mexico and Texas have all suffered deadly floods in the last week after intense rain storms. Climate change is causing even more rain to fall during the heaviest storms.

Our hearts are with everyone in Texas and those around the country that have been impacted by severe weather. The climate crisis caused by rich polluters affects all of us yet it's those who are least responsible for the problem—who suffer the most. www.npr.org/2025/07/07/n...

REACTION: Oxfam welcomes the historic ruling by the
Inter-American Human Rights Court declaring the right to a safe climate a legal obligation for governments.

Read our full response 👉 oxf.am/3TWVP9w

#HumanRights #ClimateJustice

Seville showed that considerable challenges remain to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals. But it also paved the way for governments to build more coalitions to tax the super-rich and finance care, and put equality, democracy and sustainability at the core of their efforts. Quote by Hernan Saenz, FFD Global Lead of Oxfam.

REACTION: The #FFD4 showed the challenges remaining to meet the Sustainable Development Goals - but also the power of international cooperation.

👉 oxf.am/ffd-reaction

🔥⚖️🌐final countdown to a historic moment for #ClimateJustice: in a few minutes, InterAmerican Court of Human Rights will deliver landmark authoritative judicial opinion on States' climate obligations
#AOLetsGo #OpiniónConsultiva
🧵key elements of context & analysis in thread👇

Senate tax bill would ‘leave millions hungry and without healthcare so the wealthiest few can become even richer’ — Oxfam In response to the Senate voting to pass their reconciliation bill cutting taxes and social spending, Rebecca Riddel

Combined with cuts to Medicaid, nutrition assistance, and reproductive health services, and tax breaks skewed to the wealthy, this bill will lead to a more unequal US and world
#EnvironmentalJustice #TaxJustice www.oxfamamerica.org/press/senate...

Threats to Congress’s Clean Energy Funding Will Damage the Climate and Punish Households Just some of what we’d face: Higher bills, Unbreathable Air, Unsafe homes, Loss of good job opportunities.

The bill also cuts funding for energy efficiency programs and clean energy solutions like rooftop solar that aim to benefit low-income households — forcing them to rely on more expensive and polluting energy sources. We give examples here: politicsofpoverty.oxfamamerica.org/clean-energy...

Wind, solar, and battery storage made up 89% of new U.S. electricity capacity in 2024. The bill phases out the very tax credits that enabled that growth—despite rising electricity demand across the grid.