Table of Contents

• international Court of Justice’s Climate Law Judgment Sparks Sovereignty Concerns
  • evergreen Insights
  • Frequently asked Questions

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has recently issued a judgment on the so-called “climate law,” a decision that Member of the European Parliament Mag. Roman Haider describes as crossing a “highly questionable border.” The ruling suggests that states, even those that have not signed specific climate agreements, could be held legally liable for alleged “climate seasons.”

“It is indeed simply absurd that a state should be prosecuted for commitments that it has never received,” stated FPÖ MP Roman Haider. He elaborated that the judgment is based on purported “habitual” obligations, which are unwritten norms that could now apply to states not party to the Paris Climate Agreement. Haider views this as an unprecedented setback for national sovereignty adn a direct assault on the democratic self-determination of peoples. He expressed concern that courts are increasingly overstepping their bounds, acting as legislative bodies rather than adhering to the separation of powers.

“Laws are still decided by selected parliaments in functioning democracies and not by international judges in The Hague,” Haider asserted. “we already have enough to do with correcting the worst episodes of the so-called Green Deal in europe. Now the ICJ also delivers the radical, anti-wealthy climate NGOs new ammunition.”

The judgment, according to Haider, elevates political objectives, such as the 1.5-degree goal, to a legitimate status without democratic legislative backing. He highlighted the disregard for how a singular focus on climate targets can negatively impact the European economy, affecting both businesses and citizens.

Of particular concern is the implication that even nations like the United States, which have not ratified or have withdrawn from the Paris Climate Agreement, could be compelled to justify themselves against other countries for alleged climate damages, possibly including reparations. Haider warned that this could initiate an unending series of politically motivated lawsuits against industrialized nations, holding them responsible for extreme weather events in other regions due to their alleged “climate failure.” “It is a political judgment that only serves to squeeze even more money out of powerful states,” haider concluded.

“Radical climate policy has failed – and as it no longer finds majorities on a democratic way, international courts are now to be clamped to obtain democratic processes,” he criticized.