Government of Vanuatu, including Ralph Regenvanu, Minister of Climate Change; Director General of the Pacific Community Dr. Stuart Minchin; Vishal Prasad, Director of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change; and Julian Aguon, Director of Blue Ocean Law, briefs journalists at UNOC3.
By Cecilia Russell
NICE, France, Jun 11 2025 – To the outside world, a sea level rise of 34 cm (or slightly longer than a child’s ruler) may not seem dramatic, but it’s an existential threat to the Pacific island state of Vanuatu.
Vanuatu, in support of a youth movement, the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, has approached the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on how existing international laws can be applied to strengthen action on climate change and protect people and the environment. The opinion is expected later this year.
Already there has been some success in the international campaign Vanuatu has led on behalf of the Pacific states and territories and a 2024 advisory opinion from the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea confirmed states’ obligations to prevent climate-related harm, including from non-state actors, like fossil fuel corporations under signatory states’ control.
“So, this opinion is significant. It has provided crucial certainty that protecting our oceans from climate change is international law. It’s not optional,” said Ralph Regenvanu, Minister of Climate Change, Vanuatu, emphasizing these obligations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. He was speaking at a press briefing held today (June 11, 2025) at the 3rd UN Ocean Conference underway in Nice, France.
In the case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Vanuatu has made a broad case that goes beyond climate conventions and includes human rights law and customary international rules, said Julian Aguon, Director, Blue Ocean Law.
Speakers at the conference emphasized the need for ambitious climate action, noting that the Pacific contributes less than 0.01 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions but faces severe impacts.
The case before the ICJ was crucial because its outcome could “essentially turn the page on business-as-usual and actually embark on a new course, a new era of climate change reparations,” said Aguon and the opinion, which will hopefully elaborate on the legal consequences of the breach of obligations, will mean “stepping into a new era of climate accountability.”
Vishal Prasad, Director, Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, added that communities on the frontlines of the effects of climate change should not have to pay the costs of rebuilding—whether this is seawall construction or mangrove regeneration—and bear the burdens of a group of historical polluters who fail to grasp their responsibility in exacerbating the climate crisis.
Asked by IPS about the increased reliance on fossil fuels and the poor response to reparations financing, as in the Loss and Damage Fund, Aguion said the opinion would mean countries would no longer be able to hide from their obligations.
“This will, once and for all, decisively dispel the legal ambiguity that has long hobbled the ability of the international community to respond effectively to the climate crisis.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
