2024 Geneva Dialogues on Human Rights and Climate Change

About this Session

The intensification of climate change-related extreme and slow-onset events constitutes one of the greatest threats to human rights. As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned, an increase above 1.5°C compared to pre-industrial levels in global average temperatures would lead to ecosystem collapse and jeopardize the livelihoods of millions of people. Effectively addressing climate harm requires States to take meaningful measures to stop greenhouse gas emissions, tackle the impacts of climate change, and address related losses and damages, in a way that is grounded in human rights and takes into account intersecting forms of discrimination and marginalization. In this context, ensuring safe and meaningful participation of affected communities, civil society, and Indigenous Peoples in relevant policy spaces is essential to achieve ambitious and equitable climate action.

The Human Rights Council, Special Procedures, and Human Rights Treaty Bodies are playing a pivotal role in identifying the rights and specific groups that are affected in the context of climate change, as well as the relevant obligations of States to advance human rights while addressing the triple planetary crisis. States have the duty to translate the wealth of guidance and recommendations that have been developed into effective policies and measures on the ground to ensure that climate action responds to the needs of the most marginalized individuals and communities. At the same time, Geneva-based human rights mechanisms should further engage with international, regional, and national processes that have the potential to further clarify and refine human rights obligations with regard to climate change, such as regional discussions on human rights and the environment in ASEAN and the Council of Europe, national climate law and policy development, and the ongoing climate advisory opinion processes before the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea and the Interamerican Court of Human Rights.

The 2024 Geneva Dialogues on Human Rights and Climate Change built on previous editions to discuss how Geneva-based human rights institutions can contribute to further advancing human rights-based climate action. Topics of discussion this year will include States’ obligations to tackle climate impacts; mechanisms and approaches to address ongoing loss and damage; meaningful protection of environmental defenders in the context of climate conferences; and ongoing advisory opinion processes before international and regional courts. Panelists and participants will also explore how Geneva-based human rights mechanisms can inform the ongoing advisory opinions before international courts and tribunals, and how these mechanisms can build on the outcomes of such processes. The newly appointed Special Rapporteur on human rights and climate change Elisa Morgera attended in person.

The 2024 Geneva Dialogues were organized by the Center for International Environmental Law, the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights, Earthjustice, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Geneva Office, and the Geneva Environment Network with the support of the Government of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Panelists and participants will include State representatives, Special Procedures mandate holders, members of Human Rights Treaty Bodies, representatives of civil society organizations and Indigenous Peoples, and UN officials.

The event was be followed by a light reception.

Speakers

By order of intervention.

Luc DOCKENDORF

Deputy Permanent Representative of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva

Ira GIBSON

Program Officer, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Geneva Office

Elisa MORGERA

UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and climate change

H.E. Amb. Phan Dung MAI

Permanent Representative of Viet Nam to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva

Benjamin SCHACHTER

Coordinator, Environment and Climate Change Team, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

Nahla HAIDAR

Member, Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

Yves LADOR

Representative of Earthjustice to the United Nations in Geneva

H.E. Amb. Sumbue ANTAS

Permanent Representative of Vanuatu to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva

H.E. Amb. Carlos SORRETA

Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva

H.E. Amb. Gustavo GALLÓN

Permanent Representative of Colombia to the UN office and other international organizations in Geneva

Patrícia GALVÃO TELES

Director of Legal Affairs Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Portugal

Hajer GUELDICH

Legal Counsel, African Union

Liliana ÁVILA

Director, Human Rights and Environment Program, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)

Nicole PONCE

Steering Committee member, World Youth for Climate Justice

Francesca MINGRONE

Staff Attorney, Center for International Environmental Law | Moderator

Highlights

Video

Photo Gallery

Summary

Introduction

The Human Rights Council, Special Procedures, and Human Rights Treaty Bodies play a pivotal role in identifying the rights and specific groups affected by climate change and clarifying relevant States’ obligations to advance human rights while addressing the triple planetary crisis. States must translate this wealth of guidance and recommendations into effective policies and measures to ensure that climate action responds to the needs of the most marginalized individuals and communities. Meanwhile, Geneva-based human rights mechanisms should further engage with international, regional, and national processes that may further clarify and refine human rights obligations relevant to climate change. This includes i.a., regional discussions on human rights and the environment in ASEAN and the Council of Europe, national climate law and policy development, and the ongoing climate advisory opinion processes before the International Court of Justice, the ITLOS, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

The 2024 Geneva Dialogues on Human Rights and Climate Change build on previous editions to discuss how Geneva-based human rights institutions can contribute to further advancing human rights-based climate action. Topics of discussion this year include States’ obligations to tackle climate impacts, mechanisms and approaches to address ongoing loss and damage, meaningful protection of environmental defenders in the context of climate conferences, and ongoing advisory opinion processes before international and regional courts. Panelists and participants also explore how Geneva-based human rights mechanisms can inform the ongoing advisory opinions before international courts and tribunals and how these mechanisms can build on the outcomes of such processes.

The 2024 Geneva Dialogues were organized by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), Earthjustice, the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR), the Geneva Environment Network, and the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) Geneva Office, with the support of the Government of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Panelists and participants included State representatives, Special Procedures mandate holders, Human Rights Treaty Bodies members, civil society organizations and Indigenous Peoples representatives, and UN experts.

The present document summarizes the interventions and the recommendations that emerged, outlining potential next steps to advance the role of human rights mechanisms regarding human rights-based climate action.

Opening Panel

Luc Dockendorf, Deputy Permanent Representative, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Mr. Dockendorf introduced the session by welcoming the participants, thanking the organizers, and touching upon the importance of the Geneva Dialogues as a space for open exchange. He added that a push would be necessary to achieve actual change given the enormous climate change situation. He noted that human rights were vital in tackling this triple planetary crisis, including rights such as the freedom of assembly and association, as well as other civil, social, and political rights. While mentioning the crackdown on civic space, including within the Climate Change negotiation forum, he reiterated the importance of protecting human rights defenders and environmental human rights defenders while safeguarding civic space.

Mr. Dockendorf touched upon the issue that despite scientific consensus regarding the urgency of climate change, politics would often remain “business as usual”. He commented on the intensification of denial by the political sphere vis-à-vis the state of the climate crisis and the increase of loose alliances with non-democratic, oil-producing actors threatening environmental human rights defenders. He also referred to the impact that geopolitics and the active fifty-five armed conflicts have on the environment, especially when it comes to the crime of ecocide.

In light of the above, he underlined the role of Geneva as a human rights space for approaching solutions, including through successive reports from mandate holders, including those of the outgoing UN Special Rapporteurs on the Right to Health and Right to Food. Reflecting on OHCHR’s idea of placing the economy at the service of human rights, he underlined the need to leave no one behind for a more positive future while preserving democracy and civic space. Finally, he expressed his hope that this would be reaffirmed during the Summit for the Future.

Nevertheless, he concluded by reminding participants that Geneva, as a human rights space, could offer renewed approaches and solutions to these issues through thematic and other reports from different mandate holders, like the Special Rapporteur on the right to health and on the right to food. He also commended the OHCHR for its idea of placing the economy at the service of human rights and hoped that the upcoming Summit of the Future would take the opportunity to reaffirm human rights commitments and the importance of safeguarding democracy and the civic space.

Ira Gibson, Program Officer, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Geneva Office

Ms. Gibson recalled the rich mission and history of the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) in social democracy. She explained that the role of their office in Geneva was to work on international cooperation with a special focus on freedom, justice, and solidarity.  She mentioned the foundation support of the UN Human Rights Mechanisms in protecting and promoting human rights and creating a space for exchange to inform current debates and processes, including discussing the role of mechanisms in addressing climate harm and how to bring solutions through them.

She continued on the paramount challenge that presents the climate crisis and the urgent need for action this issue requires especially in light of the polarization of the international community in recent times. She calls for further thinking to address loss and damage and climate impacts, provide information to the UN Climate Change processes, and better ways to engage more of the people affected in the discussion. Reflecting on climate cases before the European Court of Human Rights and the International Court of Justice, she also discussed how Geneva-based Human Rights Mechanisms can contribute to these developments. Finally, she reiterated FES’ core actions in Geneva on human rights protection alongside their work on climate change, migration, and other human rights-related concerns.

Panel 1: The role of Geneva-based human rights mechanisms in addressing climate harm

Prof. Elisa Morgera, UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and climate change

Professor Morgera discussed her new mandate as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Climate Change. She announced that she was still assessing the previous mandate holders’ roles and considering her own. Reflecting on her international environmental law background, she shared that she saw the added value of human rights when assessing the conduct of States, particularly since their obligations deriving from international environmental law and climate change law generally tend to be open-ended. As there is a margin of discretion for States, she believes in the importance of ensuring that measures are based on the needs of the people on the ground. She also touched upon the need to shed light on what is necessary to prevent human rights violations and that human rights may be a useful tool in clarifying specific questions of equity – between states and also between different levels of society – as well as for clarity and accountability. She noted that international environmental law and climate change law were still new instruments to address this intersectionality, and she plans to work further on this topic.

The Special Rapporteur also indicated her will to explore the indivisibility of human rights, ensuring the effective and holistic address of the triple planetary crisis while leaving no one behind. Beyond social acceptability, she considers that human rights can positively influence climate measures if they are based on lived and past experiences. She went on to explain that those experiences of climate injustice should serve as a source of essential knowledge and understanding of what is truly needed and what measures are not working. Highlighting the importance of technical cooperation, she noted that this field still requires a lot more to be done to move forward, such as transcending the obsolete understanding that technology is a flow from the North to the South and addressing the challenges arising from different capabilities. Finally, she explained her visions for her mandate, during which she will seek to pursue equitable and inclusive dialogue to highlight more effective and equitable approaches to the climate crisis.

H.E. Amb. Phan Dung Mai, Permanent Representative of Vietnam to the UN and other International Organizations in Geneva

Ambassador Mai reflected on the central role of Geneva-based human rights mechanisms in bridging the gap between human rights and climate change and the need for ambitious actions and a human rights-based approach to address this global climate crisis. He reflected on all of the Core Group on Human Rights and Climate Change’s achievements when addressing this issue. He mentioned the numerous resolutions, like Resolution 7/23, led by Vietnam, which have been instrumental in highlighting the cross-cutting issues arising from the worsening of the climate crisis, such as the right to livelihood, loss, and damage, or the disproportionate impact felt by vulnerable groups. Referring to the Core Group’s plan to delve even deeper into the interconnection of climate change and human rights, he explained that by choosing to focus on just transition during the next Human Rights Council Session, they wanted to address the impact of net zero ambitions on human rights and specifically on vulnerable communities. He reminded us of the origin of the term just transition, meaning to acknowledge everyone’s human rights and create an economy that is fair, equitable, and sustainable, creating decent work opportunities, reducing inequalities and poverty, upholding women’s rights, and addressing vulnerable communities’ needs.

Ambassador Mai announced that the Draft Resolution on Human Rights and Climate will build on previous resolutions and seek to address the need to just transition to a low-carbon economy in our effort to address the climate crisis. He added that the text will also consider the intersection between climate change and human rights in fostering global solidarity and international cooperation, including capacity building, technological transfer, innovative financing, and other means to ensure a just transition. The drafting process to ensure a resolution about a just transition to a sustainable future that leaves no one behind will be inclusive, harness all expertise, and include every stakeholder’s input, he added.

The Ambassador concluded his intervention by emphasizing the importance of ensuring climate policies are inclusive, effective, and uphold human rights. He also emphasized the need to build on efforts already accomplished to develop global strategies and build consensus at the international level to foster more international cooperation and trust between all stakeholders.

Nahla Haidar, Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)

Ms. Haidar offered a comprehensive overview of the ongoing challenges and advancements in integrating a gender perspective when addressing climate change and human rights. She began by acknowledging the persistent denial of the urgency of the climate crisis. She emphasized the necessity for a more committed approach to tackling these interconnected issues. She underscored the importance of bringing the micro-level perspectives of treaty bodies, such as the CEDAW or the CRC, to these discussions. Despite progress, she pointed out the lack of effective connection between various treaty bodies and the need for a cumulative impact in their efforts—a goal they are working toward with the support of the OHCHR.

Reflecting on the CEDAW’s historical stance, Ms. Haidar recalled that several years ago, the committee already recognized climate change as a significant setback for women and girls, posing constant threats to the realization of their rights. In 2018, the CEDAW issued General Recommendation No. 37, focusing on the gender-related dimensions of disaster risk reduction in a changing climate. However, she added that at that time, there was a lack of tools to effectively communicate states’ obligations and insufficient scientific evidence to support their claims. Today, thanks to the IPCC, she said that the CEDAW could present more authoritative evidence to state parties to discuss adaptation policies and demand more protective measures. Recalling Ambassador Mai’s intervention, Ms. Haidar also stressed the necessity of a transformative approach, advocating for preventive measures rather than reactive ones. This includes the crucial need for more data collection to enhance impact analysis.

She mentioned that from the outset, the CEDAW has emphasized that climate change exacerbates discrimination and addressed this issue in a country-specific manner. She recalled the body of Concluding Observations existing that evaluate how state parties have implemented these measures. She noted that the discussions increasingly revolve around mitigation strategies, extraterritorial obligations, and the activation of relevant international frameworks such as the SDGs, the UNFCCC, and the Sendai Framework and that CEDAW is trying to engage with States to report on their progress within these frameworks.

Ms. Haidar proposed to adopt an enhanced follow-up mechanism to ensure the effective implementation of climate adaptation strategies. She suggested that more frequent and focused follow-ups are necessary, as the current 4-5-year reporting cycle is too lengthy and often results in crucial details being overlooked. She also expressed her satisfaction with recent litigation developments, particularly the significance of the European Court of Human Rights recognizing the gender dimension of climate change in its rulings. This landmark case sets a binding legal precedent for 46 countries and has far-reaching implications beyond Europe. Ms. Haidar concluded by expressing her eagerness to collaborate with the new Special Rapporteur on the issue.

Benjamin Schachter, Coordinator, Environment and Climate Change Team, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

Mr. Schachter reflected on the importance of dialogues like these and the achievement of the Human Rights Council and the Core Group in the last ten years in bringing human rights and climate change into the discourse. Reflecting on relevant actions undertaken by the UN thus far, he noted there is a familiarity, awareness, and understanding of the connection between human rights and climate change that was previously missing. Nonetheless, he noted that the Human Rights Council can still do more in terms of taking up recommendations from the OHCHR Report on Human Rights and Climate Change, particularly in creating mechanisms for follow-up and capacity-building. He considers silos a major challenge in OHCHR’s work and the need to approach this issue more holistically. He said that the OHCHR needs support to address those contradictions when working towards the right to a healthy environment and a safe climate.

He announced that the Human Rights Council Panel Discussion on Climate Change and Human Rights would focus on loss and damage and sustainable livelihood, serving as a nice transition to the Council’s next topic of just transition. He reminded everyone that the mandated Secretary-General Report will be presented during the 55th session of the Human Rights Council in October 2024. Mr. Schachter explained that the report notes the lack of definition of loss and damage and the fact that it comes from the political process of the UNFCCC, where the discussion is being framed as a political one rather than a human rights one. Bearing that in mind, Mr Schachter added that the OHCHR decided to approach loss and damage through an equity lens,  focusing on human rights abuses, accountability, and access to remedy. He went on to explain that this means integrating human rights into climate change policies (e.g., NAPs), as social protection is one of the most effective ways to protect people from climate change.  Also, he expressed that this means looking into how to change the tax structure so that people responsible for the crisis are paying for it.

He took the time to address the recent developments in terms of climate litigation and access to justice, such as the International Court of Justice, which is looking into facilitating access to justice for those affected by climate change. He also mentioned the increasing importance of transitional justice as a potential mechanism to address mass-scale violations of human rights caused by climate change. He reported that this process matches how climate change affects people’s human rights, looking at who is responsible, thus achieving true justice.  He concluded by reminding participants that to stop future loss and damage from happening, the only way was to stop climate change.

Yves Lador, Representative of Earthjustice to the United Nations in Geneva

Mr. Lador commented on the current backlash faced by environmental human rights defenders and reiterated the importance of democratic processes, with the safe and meaningful participation of impacted people. He mentioned that there are ongoing challenges concerning COP and the mechanism’s role. He reflected on the role of the Geneva-based organizations in this regard, especially with the upcoming COP and the preparation of the NDC process. Despite diminishing enthusiasm, he considers this a crucial process that needs national commitments to give the international community a target. Mr. Lador reiterated the need for clear public participation in this process, stating that we need to have information, see what is happening on the ground, and mobilize for solutions. He deemed this should be a topic of discussion for the upcoming Human Rights Council Sessions.

Mr. Lador also highlighted the significance of the human rights community in Geneva celebrating the five-year anniversary of A/HRC/RES/40/11, “Recognizing the contribution of environmental human rights defenders to the enjoyment of human rights, environmental protection and sustainable development,” recalling that this resolution, adopted without a vote, sent a very clear message and serves as a compass for all involved. On the way to COP29, he views two important deadlines: the SBI meeting in Bonn and the upcoming Human Rights Council session. He noted that during last year’s Bonn meeting, an interesting discussion led to changes in the registration process to ensure more transparency and a commitment to meaningful engagement of Observer Organizations, including facilitating virtual participation. However, he noted that trends at the SB60 indicate a reversal, with no live streaming planned, and he raised concerns about how victims in the field can participate. Additionally, he mentioned that there is a very limited number of badges allocated this year. He emphasized the necessity of making the hosting agreement for COP29 public, a request that has repeatedly gone unfulfilled.

Mr. Lador also addressed issues from the last Human Rights Council session in March, where discussions with people from Azerbaijan highlighted water scarcity concerns. He alerted that an environmental human rights defender from Azerbaijan, previously involved, had since been arrested on what are considered bogus charges, signaling an escalating crackdown on voices in the country. He said that he feared this situation raised concerns among activists about their safety and participation in the coming COP. He also expressed the view that too many businesses and fossil fuel industries were present at COP, hindering free speech and raising concerns for media and journalists not being able to reach the country because of previous work, and highlighting the need to see the hosting agreement.

To redress the situation, Mr. Lador called for the immediate release of the environmental human rights defender in Azerbaijan, allowing him to participate in SB60 and COP29. He mentioned a climate justice initiative being prepared in Baku and stressed the importance of international support. Failure to address this issue would send the wrong message globally, he added. Finally, he highlighted the upcoming peace discussions with Armenia, emphasizing the need for clear messages from the international community to prevent conflict, asserting that hosting a COP on climate change in a war zone is unthinkable.

Panel 2: Geneva-based human rights mechanisms and climate-relevant ongoing international legal processes

H.E. Amb. Sumbue Antas, Permanent Representative of Vanuatu to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva

Ambassador Antas reflected on the importance of state engagement in key issues and their legal consequences and the critical role of Permanent Representation in Geneva. He began by posing a fundamental question: what is the biggest risk of our time? He responded by saying that while climate change is a major concern, it must be considered in the context of the human rights of individuals, a principle expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. He stressed the importance of recognizing people’s rights in an evolving and changing society. He also reminded the audience of the origins of the initiative for the ICJ Advisory Opinion, first led by Vanuatu’s Student. He noted that this effort requires reflecting on why the international community sought this Advisory Opinion in the first place. He highlighted that the people in New York negotiating the decision had to take into account other multilateral treaties relevant to the climate change situation. He continued by saying that these include agreements on the protection of the ozone layer, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Law of the Sea, and their relevant human rights implications.

Ambassador Santas announced the 24th of June as the deadline for submitting written comments to the ICJ proceeding and pointing out that there might be an extension. He explained that once the written procedures have concluded, the court will retire, and the Opinion will be delivered hopefully in early 2025. He announced that currently, more than fifty States from the Global South are participating, and the rates are ever-increasing. Recognizing that more engagement is needed from these regions, he encouraged States to participate in these conversations, adding that it is very interesting to see that many countries are participating in advisory proceedings for the first time. He noted that 90% of greenhouse gas emissions are not caused by Small Island Developing States (SIDS), but rather by the Global North.

He recalled that in Geneva, human rights institutions play a pivotal role in advancing human-rights-based climate action. He noted that the Human Rights Council and the Special Procedures serve as valuable platforms for holding states accountable. He expressed his gratitude to the Geneva Dialogue and reaffirmed his support and commitment to this partnership in advancing human rights-based climate action at the international level. He noted that current climate negotiations were too slow to address the climate impact and emphasized the need for ambition and decisive action. Underlining that the IPCC has stressed the necessity of robust and decisive measures, he invited participants to unite for the health of our planet.

H.E. Amb. Carlos Sorreta, Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva

Ambassador Sorrete noted that states must ground their arguments in solid legal arguments to be persuasive rather than political or emotional arguments. The Vanuatu-sponsored resolution was adopted by consensus, yet he highlighted that some emitter States in their submission only recognized the relationship between human rights and climate change, in consideration of environmental defenders or people displaced by climate change. He views it as a challenge to change the narrative and to push States to go beyond that and tap into customary norms to show the International Court of Justice that there are such norms in place. He acknowledged that even those who question the existence of such norms do not question relevant scientific findings. He considers that states must consider human rights conventions and see them as constituent instruments and living documents. He added that submissions need to mention those human rights norms that do apply in the case of climate change and can pressure States to respect their international obligation when they are contributing to the climate crisis.

Then, Ambassador Sorrete discussed the norms in the UN Charter that are also relevant, particularly with regard to territorial integrity. As rising sea levels take up state territory, territorial integrity and even state existence are at stake, he recalled.  He added that this could almost be considered as a genocide, noting the intent as the important element of the case. As lack of natural resources, sea level rise, and changing maritime lines threaten peace and security, he views no limitation on the legal powers of the UN Security Council to act since this will threaten peace and security. He concluded by saying that the Philippines expressed similar arguments when appearing before the ITLOS and is planning on doing the same before the ICJ.

H.E. Amb. Gustavo Gallon, Permanent Representative of Colombia to the UN office and other international organizations in Geneva

Ambassador Gallon noted that as climate change affects everyone, especially vulnerable populations, states must comply with relevant international obligations, safeguarding fundamental rights, including the right to health, housing, food, and others. He added that international cooperation based on common but differentiated responsibilities may provide effective measures to conserve, protect, and restore the ecosystems while recognizing and assuming responsibilities. In this context, he considers it essential to ensure a habitable environment for future generations, per intergenerational equity. In light of the above, he recalled that Colombia and Chile requested in January 2023 an Advisory Opinion from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights that will constitute a milestone on liability obligations and human rights obligations with respect to the climate crisis. Underlining that Colombia’s ecological integrity has suffered irreparable damage due to climate change, especially in some areas, he noted that there is a differential impact of climate change on education and health available to the population. He announced that his government called on the Court to address these gaps in the Advisory Opinion.

Ambassador Gallon continued by mentioning that Colombia launched a climate action and gender action plan, informed by the participation of peasant activists, Afro-Colombians, and indigenous women. He also added that it is necessary to develop policies focusing on migrants, refugees, and forcibly displaced people. Regarding human rights defenders with an environmental focus, he mentioned that their protection must be guaranteed. He pointed to Colombia’s National Development Plan in 2022 to recognize the importance of protecting and promoting the memory and heritage of these populations. Towards that, he noted that territorial management capacity must be strengthened, Colombia ratified the Escazu Agreement to ensure this and has also signed the Escazu Agreement.

The Ambassador concluded by stating that Colombia was working for sustainable peace and recognizing the relationship between environmental protection and human rights. The country recognizes and highlights the role the IACtHR has undertaken in this regard. As States are part of the universal legal framework, he acknowledged these Advisory Proceedings as fundamental in safeguarding these rights.

Professor Patrícia Galvao Teles, Director of Legal Affairs Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Portugal

Professor Galvao addressed the panel, speaking from her dual roles as a legal advisor at the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and as a member of the International Law Commission. She highlighted her pride in Portugal being potentially the first state to submit written observations in the ICJ Advisory Opinion Proceedings. Additionally, she serves as a co-chair of the ILC group focusing on sea level rise and international law.

On the question of how human rights can help tackle the climate crisis, Professor Galvao Teles referred to her work on sea level rise, which is a significant adverse impact of climate change. She emphasized that the human rights principles applicable to the protection of individuals affected by sea level rise are equally relevant to the broader climate crisis. Her committee examines sea level rise from the perspective of the law of the sea, its impact on maritime zones, the potential loss of statehood, and the protection of affected individuals. She noted that despite the lack of specific mention of sea-level rise in international frameworks, the Geneva community remains fully aware of the possibility of applying existing laws to these cases.  She mentioned as examples the overarching principle of human dignity, the general application of human rights law, and a human rights-based approach, pointing out that there is always a duty bearer for human rights obligations.

She called on the need to better protect vulnerable groups and respect the principle of non-discrimination. She sees this as particularly relevant to the principle of non-refoulement, which human rights law has already affirmed. Additionally, she considers protecting the cultural and traditional practices of individuals key, as is the principle of international cooperation at regional, subregional, and international levels.

On her expectations from the advisory opinion processes, Professor Galvao Teles expressed optimism about the sequence of advisory opinions. She anticipated that ITLOS would first provide its opinion on a specialized area, followed by the IACtHR delving into more concrete human rights obligations, and finally, the ICJ would offer an opinion based on consensus questions and adopt a resolution. This sequence, she noted, underscores the importance of the states’ attachment to the topic, as evidenced by the consensus-based resolution, which has been rare since the reparations to the UN.

She discussed Portugal’s submission, in which they emphasize their vulnerability to climate change. She referenced the IPCC’s identification of Portugal as a vulnerable country, particularly to forest fires, one of which led to a case before the ECHR. She highlighted that these advisory processes would likely clarify state obligations related to climate change. Echoing the Philippine Ambassador, she stressed the need for better interpretation of human rights treaties, environmental protection treaties, and UNCLOS to enhance legal clarity and protection against climate change.

Professor Galvao Teles shared her personal expectation that the submissions would help the ICJ use this opportunity to clarify and develop the duty of cooperation in the context of climate change. She hopes for more legal clarification on the scope and content of this duty, viewing these processes as unique and important opportunities to complement political efforts in addressing the climate crisis.

Professor Hajer Gueldich, Legal Counsel, African Union (By video)

Ms. Gueldich reiterated the African Union’s commitment to the International Court of Justice Advisory Proceedings as a critical forum to address the intersection of climate change and human rights. She views the AU’s role in this proceedings as twofold: firstly, to advocate for legal principles that reflect the unique vulnerabilities and needs of the African nations in the face of climate change, and secondly, to ensure that international law recognizes and enforces the responsibility of states to mitigate climate impact in a manner that respects human rights. She stated that the AU seeks to ensure that global legal norms are involved to better address the realities of climate change, particularly for those who are most affected but least responsible. She added that the AU aims to use this platform to voice the concerns of African communities and push for robust legal mechanisms that enforce accountability and facilitate meaningful climate action grounded in human rights principles. She explained this as the reason why the AU has taken a proactive and significant role in the International Court of Justice Advisory Proceedings on Climate Change, advocating for legal approaches that consider the unique challenges and the perspectives of African member states

Ms. Gueldich elaborated on how the nations’ involvement aligns with broader efforts to ensure that international climate change law is accountable and reflective of the needs of all nations, especially those the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. She noted that the AU’s role extends beyond advocacy but also involves empowering its 55 member states to engage effectively in international legal processes. For instance, she recalled an online capacity-building workshop organized by the AU in March 2024 to equip participants from member states with the knowledge and tools necessary to draught strong written statements which demonstrates the AU’s commitment to ensuring that the voices of African nations are not only heard but are also influential in shaping international law.

Moreover, she explained that the AU, in its submissions, argued for international law to better commit to and integrate sustainable development, particularly focusing on adaptation strategies. Given Africa’s vulnerability to climate impacts, the AU promoted legal frameworks that facilitate effective adaptation measures across the continent, such as enhancing agricultural resilience, improving water management, and constructing climate-resilient infrastructure. She further explained that the African Union’s engagement in processes such as the ICJ Advisory Opinion and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea is part of a larger strategy to bolster African presence and leadership in key international law forums. She expressed that this initiative seeks to remedy historical disparities by ensuring that African views are considered in the formulation of international law that impacts the continent

Concluding, Ms Gueldich added that the AU, through its legal interventions and advocacy initiatives, seeks to ensure that international climate change law is just and equitable, recognising the specific challenges faced by African nations. She stated that this approach not only addresses the immediate needs related to climate impacts but also contributes to the long-term goal of sustainable and equitable global development in Africa.

Liliana Ávila, Director, Human Rights and Environment Program, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) (By video)

After introducing the work of her organization, Ms. Ávila shared three key aspects they learned from people regarding communities’ participation and engagement in advisory proceedings. Firstly, she mentioned the importance of communities to understand these processes. She expressed that this is an emergency not only because of climate change but also because of the lack of rule of law and the lack of wide recognition and the rights of legal standards that promote human rights in a climate change emergency. Secondly, she continued by saying communities have been suffering for many years from the impacts of activities that are also contributing the most to the climate crisis, i.e., fossil fuels industries and agro-industries that have damaged a lot of territories in South America and also have been involved with many human rights violations. She views these advisory proceedings as an important mechanism to halt such activities and seek better ways to produce energy where human rights and land and territory rights for communities won’t be damaged. Lastly, she concluded by explaining that communities expect the international community and the legal international system to promote the standards that could help them in their territories to continue living there and taking care of them because they are important to prevent the crisis, and they still expect and want to be part of the discussion of the and the contributions to stop this crisis.

Nicole Ponce, Steering Committee member, World Youth for Climate Justice

Nicole Ponce began by emphasizing the critical commenting period of the ICJ proceeding, where states and international organizations that provided initial input can now submit written statements. She views this period as an essential opportunity for further engagement. She expressed that during state outreach and engagements, it has become apparent that many states in the Global South are making strong arguments regarding international responsibility for climate-related damage, which they view as a crucial component of climate justice. However, she noted that some countries’ statements have been somewhat defensive and have not adequately addressed the second legal question concerning legal consequences, nor have they fully acknowledged the nexus between human rights and climate change. Ms. Ponce highlighted three key issues that need to be honed in on: applicable law, State responsibility beyond the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, and climate science. She urged states to send progressive arguments that strengthen the human rights nexus with climate change and to push for the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities, which is based on equity and acknowledges the human rights aspect of the climate crisis. She recalled that the focus is on climate justice and the responsibility for internationally wrongful acts.

Ms. Ponce also pointed out that this is a novel issue and possibly a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to shape this argument, aiming to generate intergenerational equity. She sees this as an impactful way to strengthen UNFCCC processes and provide impetus for more ambitious action under the Paris Agreement. She concluded by reiterating that the comment period is a critical window to reinforce arguments supporting human rights and to counter anti-climate justice approaches. Ensuring that those most affected are fully engaged in sending comments is crucial for meaningful participation and impactful outcomes.

Links

• Business and Human Rights, Environment, and the Role of Geneva
• Human Rights and the Environment
• Mobilizing Climate Actors in International Geneva
• 2023 Geneva Dialogues on Human Rights and Climate Change | 17 May 2023