El informe:
www.un.org/en/climatech...

67/ 🔜Please do not miss our high-level panel tomorrow to unpack key learnings from this historic judicial ruling and what lays ahead!
📅July 24., 5:30pm CEST
📝online registration: bit.ly/ICJresponse
#AOLetsGo #ClimateJusticeAO

66/ 🎆 What a clear ruling today! What a victory for #ClimateJustice!
On fossil fuels, right to a healthy environment, historic responsibility, compensation, duties of States withdrawing from Paris: the Court's affirmation of legal principles will enable a new era of accountability.

52/🚨The Court then delivers a powerful statement: failure of a state to take appropriate action to regulate fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel licences, fossil fuel subsidies may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that state

44/⚖️🌱the Court then leans its full support to the imperative of protecting the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment resulting from the interdependence between human rights and the protection of the environment.

27/ 🌡️With regard to the temperature threshold relevant for today's ruling, the Court affirms, building on science and COP decisions, that the 1.5c temperature target must be understood as the internationally agreed objective of climate policies!

10/ 🔥Judge Iwasawa Yuji quotes straight from the IPCC: "Warming of 1.5°C is not considered 'safe' for most nations, communities, ecosystems and sectors, and poses significant risks to natural and human systems." - this is a very strong basis for the Court's legal conclusions!

9/ 🧑‍🔬Science: the Court notes that the States participating in the process recognized the @ipcc.bsky.social as the best available science. Judge Iwasawa Yuji goes on summarizing key findings of the IPCC latest report.

🗣️ La #OpiniónConsultiva de la Corte Interamericana de #DerechosHumanos es contundente: Los Estados deben tomar acción frente a la crisis climática.

➡️ Deslice para las citas de nuestras expertas.

👇 Lea el comunicado de CIEL.

🔗 bit.ly/4ljFIOU

36/ In that context, States also have the obligation to define and update national adaptation plans, designed in a manner that reaches adaptation goals for each states while reducing vulnerability and increasing resilience of people, communities and ecosystems.

34/ States must define a mitigation strategy based on human rights, ensuring appropriate measures with real possibility of being enforced (principle of effectiveness), considering the sectors where the main GHG emissions are generated for each sector, incl. regulating companies.

33/ 🎯in defining their targets, States must consider best available science, common but differentiated responsibility (cumulative emissions, capacity, national circumstances), progressiveness, equality, prevention, precaution.
This echoes UN climate agreements obligations.

32/ The Court derives specific mitigation obligations with regard to the regulation, supervision and monitoring, incl. requiring need for mitigation goals, maintaining an implementation strategy based on human rights and regulation of private actors.

30/ The Court recognizes that climate impacts harm individuals unequally, within and across generations. The protection of human rights and the rights of nature requires a consistent and systemically integrated legal framework.

29/ The Court notes the linkage between this principle and the principles of prevention, precaution and progressiveness, incl. the need for equitable distribution of the burden related to climate action and the prevention of disproportionate burden on future generations.