Thammasat University students interested in law, environmental studies, biology, sociology, political science, economics, philosophy, anthropology, and related subjects may find it useful to participate in a free 11 July Zoom book launch on The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law.

The event, on Thursday, 11 July 2024 at 7pm Bangkok time, is organized by the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, University of Cambridge, the United Kingdom.

The event announcement explains:

Professor Daniel Bodansky’s seminal and widely acclaimed book The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law was first published in 2010. In contrast to other general works on international environmental law, the book focused on the processes of developing, implementing, and enforcing international environmental law rather than on legal doctrine. In order to comprehensively analyse these processes, the book is highly interdisciplinary, relying not only on the legal toolkit but integrating perspectives and lenses of political science and economics, as well as philosophy, sociology, and anthropology.

This year, Oxford University Press published the second edition of The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law, co-authored by Professors Daniel Bodansky and Harro van Asselt. Aside from the co-authorship, this second edition differs in several important aspects from the previous edition, in order to adequately reflect the important developments that international environmental law has witnessed during the last decade.

At this event, Professors Bodansky and van Asselt will provide an overview of the approach to international environmental law taken in this second edition, highlighting the ways in which it differs from the first. This presentation is intended to subsequently lead to a discussion on developments specifically in the international climate change regime, including prospects for the Paris Agreement and the recent request for an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on climate change.

Discussant: Joanna Depledge

Chair: Dr Markus Gehring

The TU Library collection includes several books about different aspects of international environmental law.

Students are invited to register at this link for the event:

https://cam-ac-uk.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_euyXSoieROWOw8NWfrnnrw#/registration

In 2022, Professor Bodansky posted on the website of The Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES) an article,

An ICJ Advisory Opinion on Climate Change: Ten Questions and Answers

Introduction

In recent years, the role of climate change litigation has become increasingly prominent. Thus far, most climate cases around the world have been brought in national courts. But there is also growing interest in the role of international courts and tribunals in addressing climate change, including the International Court of Justice (ICJ), regional and human rights bodies, and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. In September 2021, Vanuatu announced at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (UNGA) that it intended to build a coalition of states to request an advisory opinion on climate change from the ICJ.1 The Vanuatu initiative is supported by various grassroots youth groups, including the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change and the World Youth for Climate Justice, which argue that climate change threatens the rights of present and future generations. At the March 2022 CARICOM Conference, heads of government from the Caribbean region indicated their support for Vanuatu’s initiative, and other countries have endorsed it as well, including Australia. Vanuatu has assembled a legal team that is currently working to craft the precise legal question to put before the ICJ and may bring its proposal before UNGA this October.

QUESTION 1: WHAT IS THE ICJ?

The ICJ is the “principal judicial organ” of the UN. It comprises 15 judges elected for nine-year terms by absolute majorities of both UNGA and the Security Council. ICJ judges are drawn from government lawyers, diplomats, academics, and practitioners, and serve in their individual capacity rather than as state representatives.

QUESTION 2: WHAT IS AN ICJ ADVISORY OPINION?

The UN Charter gives the ICJ two basic functions: (1) resolving legal disputes between states; and (2) providing advice on legal issues to UN bodies. Contentious cases are initiated by states and depend on state consent. A state may consent to the jurisdiction of the ICJ by means of a special agreement or treaty or by accepting the so-called “optional clause” of the ICJ statute (Article 36), which provides for compulsory jurisdiction.

Judgments in contentious cases are binding on the parties to the dispute pursuant to Article 94(1) of the UN Charter and may be enforced through Security Council measures pursuant to Article 94(2).6 Advisory opinions may be given by the ICJ in response to a request by UNGA or Security Council or by other organs of the UN and specialized agencies (UN Article 96). Requests by UNGA or Security Council may concern any legal question, while requests by other organs of the UN or by specialized agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO) or International Maritime Organization (IMO) must concern a question arising within the scope of their activities. As of August 2022, the ICJ has given 27 advisory opinions, including 17 at the request of UNGA and one at the request of the Security Council. […]

From the Conclusion:

Many factors are potentially relevant in considering whether UNGA should request an advisory opinion on climate change: What will the advisory opinion say?

• Will the opinion add significantly to what has been agreed under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement— for example, by saying that international law imposes a duty to provide compensation for L&D or that the principle of due diligence imposes objective standards by which to evaluate the adequacy of NDCs? Or will the opinion defer to the UNFCCC regime by concluding that the outcomes of the UN negotiating process fill the field of international climate change law?
• On the positive side, an advisory opinion might influence some states to adopt stronger climate policies, help in domestic climate litigation, affect public opinion, and bolster arguments in the UNFCCC negotiations for stronger climate action.
• On the negative side, an advisory opinion could reduce pressure in the UNFCCC negotiations for stronger action, undermine the delicate compromises and constructive ambiguity in the Paris Agreement, or undermine domestic climate litigation. Apart from the effects of the advisory opinion itself, what will be the effects of requesting an advisory opinion and how much do these matter?
• Would requesting an advisory opinion make the UNFCCC negotiations more adversarial and acrimonious?
• Would it make some states less willing to reach compromise outcomes while the advisory opinion request is pending?
• Would it give voice to states with less influence in the UNFCCC negotiations? Is the ICJ the appropriate body to determine what international law provides on climate change?
• Thus far, climate change law has developed through international negotiations among states, primarily in the UNFCCC process, but also in fora such as the IMO, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and Montreal Protocol. The need to gain international consensus among states has made progress difficult and slow, but arguably has been important for the regime’s legitimacy and broad acceptability by states. Requesting an advisory opinion from the ICJ would inject the ICJ into this politically fraught process.
• To the extent that international law is clear on the question posed to the ICJ, then an ICJ advisory opinion could simply articulate what the law requires and would advance rule-of-law values.
• To the extent international law related to climate change is uncertain or underdeveloped, then an ICJ advisory opinion would need to clarify or elaborate the law and would necessarily have a creative element. That would raise the fundamental question, should climate law be developed through negotiations among states or by a judicial body?

(All images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)