On Wednesday, 23 July 2025, the International Court of Justice issued its long-awaited advisory opinion on the obligations of states under international law in the context of climate change.

In the groundbreaking opinion, the Court clearly established that states have legally binding obligations to protect the climate system, including upholding their human rights obligations, and can be held accountable for failing to do so.

The ICJ climate advisory opinion has significant implications for Africa’s oil and gas industry. Essentially, the Court declared that states have a binding legal duty to mitigate climate change and protect ecosystems. This means that Africa, like other continents, must ensure that its oil and gas activities do not harm the environment or violate human rights across the entire value chain.

For Africa, this advisory opinion could mean increased scrutiny of oil projects, including Uganda’s East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), the Tilenga and Kingfisher projects, offshore oil developments in Nigeria, among many others, given concerns that these projects could generate massive carbon emissions, damage ecosystems, and displace communities.

The ICJ advisory opinion strengthens the position of climate activists and affected communities seeking to challenge these projects, potentially leading to stricter environmental assessments and stronger regulations.

In fact, Greenpeace USA could rely on this ICJ advisory opinion in appealing a case where it was ordered to pay US$660 million in damages for defamation and other claims brought by a pipeline company in connection with protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline construction in North Dakota.

It is also worth noting that the European Parliament had already called for an end to extractive activities in protected areas, including in Uganda, Tanzania, and Nigeria. This international pressure, combined with the ICJ advisory opinion, may push African countries to prioritize sustainable energy solutions and ensure that oil and gas activities align with global climate obligations.

The advisory opinion serves as a warning to Africa that oil and gas exploration must balance economic interests with environmental protection and human rights.

The highest court of the United Nations issued a landmark advisory opinion stating that nations can be held legally accountable for their greenhouse gas emissions. Recognizing the “urgent and existential threat” facing the world, the International Court of Justice concluded that those harmed by human-caused climate change may be entitled to reparations.

The Court’s opinion largely rests on the application of existing international law, clarifying that climate-related harms can be directly linked to major emitters and fossil fuel producers.

In a unanimous decision issued on 23 July, the 15 judges of the ICJ concluded that the production and consumption of fossil fuels “may constitute an internationally wrongful act attributable to that state.”

The opinion further states that limiting global warming to 1.5°C should be considered the primary temperature goal for nations and that countries are obligated to make adequate contributions toward achieving it.

Although the ICJ opinion is not legally binding on governments, it could carry significant influence as vulnerable communities and nations seek stronger climate action or compensation through courts and international legal mechanisms.

The International Court of Justice also ruled that governments must phase out fossil fuels, rapidly reduce emissions, provide remedies for those suffering climate-related damages, and increase climate financing for developing countries.

This advisory opinion elevates national commitments globally by confirming that countries must reduce emissions sufficiently to protect the universal rights to life, food, health, and a clean environment.

All countries, especially wealthy nations, are now expected to cut emissions more aggressively and accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels. Rich countries must also increase climate financing to Global South nations to help them reduce emissions and protect their populations from both past and future climate-related harm.

This is no longer a matter of political promises — it is now framed as an issue of international legal responsibility.

As the world marks a decade since the Paris Agreement, this advisory opinion signals the end of weak and inadequate commitments, including the long-debated annual US$100 billion climate financing pledge to least developed countries under the Paris framework.

It also opens the door for climate-vulnerable countries to pursue reparations from high-emitting nations for climate-related losses and damages.

Africa now possesses a stronger legal and moral tool for holding countries accountable for their obligations, particularly in protecting the world’s most marginalized populations and future generations.

As the world prepares for COP30 in Brazil, the advisory opinion from the world’s highest court raises the stakes significantly. It affirms that climate action is not optional — it is a legal duty. It also reinforces the United Nations General Assembly resolution recognizing the right to a clean and healthy environment.

A new era for climate action — one rooted in justice, obligation, equity, and accountability — may finally be emerging.

By Mugisha Imam