Transboundary Harm Principle and Climate Change in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Evaluating the Advisory Proceedings of the International Court of Justice

Abstract

Increasing concerns regarding climate change have significantly influenced discussions within the realm of international law. These deliberations have consequently led to a heightened interest in the role of international tribunals in addressing climate change issues. The International Court of Justice recently addressed the primary questions pertinent to these central discussions to establish resolutions for issues such as damage reparation, attribution, and due diligence. This study aims to evaluate these discussions while considering the decision of the Court within the context of the transboundary harm principle and its application to areas beyond national jurisdiction. In this context, the initial focus will be on the historical context of environmental protection in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Subsequently, an analysis of the existing legal framework concerning the transboundary harm principle and its implementation will be conducted. Finally, the Court's decision will be evaluated the current legal discussions.

Keywords

• ransboundary harm principle
• International Court of Justice
• Climate change
• Responsibility
• Reparation

Ulusal Yetki Alanı Dışındaki Bölgelerde Sınır Aşan Zarar ve İklim Değişikliği: Uluslararası Adalet Divanı’nın Danışma Görüşü Sürecinin Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

İklim değişikliğiyle ilgili artan endişeler, uluslararası hukuk alanındaki tartışmaları önemli ölçüde etkilemiştir. Yaşanan gelişmelerin sonucunda, uluslararası mahkemelerin iklim değişikliği meselelerini ele almadaki rolüne olan ilgi artmıştır. Bu kapsamda, Uluslararası Adalet Divanı, yakın zamanda, zarar tazmini, atfedilebilirlik ve due diligence gibi konular için çözüm getirebilmek amacıyla, hukuki tartışmalarla ilgili temel soruları ele almıştır. Bu çalışma, Divan’ın kararını, sınır aşan zarar ilkesi ve bu ilkenin ulusal yetki alanı dışındaki bölgelere uygulanması bağlamında değerlendirerek, söz konusu tartışmaları incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda öncelikle, ulusal yetki alanı dışındaki bölgelerde çevrenin korunmasına ilişkin hukuki tartışmalar ele alınacaktır. Daha sonra, sınır aşan zarar ilkesine ve bu ilkenin uluslararası hukuktaki uygulanmasına ilişkin mevcut hukuki çerçeve analiz edilecektir. Son olarak, Divan’ın kararı, güncel hukuki tartışmalar ışığında değerlendirilecektir.

Keywords

• Sınır aşan zarar ilkesi
• Uluslararası Adalet Divanı
• İklim değişikliği
• sorumluluk
• Tazminat

References

1. Boyle, A, ‘Reparation for Environmental Damage in International Law: Some Preliminary Problems’ in Michael Bowman and Alan Boyle (eds) Environmental Damage in International and Comparative Law: Problems of Definition and Valuation (Oxford University Press 2002). google scholar
2. Craik, N, Davenport, T., and Mackenzie, R., Liability for Environmental Harm to the Global Commons (Cambridge University Press 2023). google scholar
3. Harrison, J, ‘Litigation under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: Opportunities to Support and Supplement the Climate Change Regime’ in Ivano Alogna, Christine Bakker and Jean-Pierre Gauci (eds) Climate Change Litigation: Global Perspective (Brill 2021). google scholar
4. Jervan, M, ‘The Prohibition of Transboundary Environmental Harm. An Analysis of the Contribution of the International Court of Justice to the Development of the No-harm Rule’ (PluriCourts Research article No. 14-17 2014). google scholar
5. Marboe, I, ‘The Importance of Guidelines and Codes of Conduct for Liability of States and Private Actors’ in Irmgrad Marboe (ed) Soft Law in Outer Space: The Function of Nonbinding Norms in International Space Law (Böhlau Verlag 2012). google scholar
6. Matz-Lück, N, ‘The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind: its viability as a Management Tool for Deep-Sea Genetic Resources’ in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Erik J. Molenaar (eds), The International Legal Regime of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction: Current and Future Developments (Marinus Publishers 2010). google scholar
7. Oduntan, G, Sovereignty and Jurisdiction in the Airspace and Outer Space (Routledge 2012). google scholar
8. Patricia B, Boyle A, and Redgwell C., International Law and the Environment. (3rd. Ed., Oxford University Press 2009). google scholar

9. Prip, C, ‘Integrating Climate Change in the Governance of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction’ in Elise Johansen, Signe Veierud Busch, Ingvild Ulrikke Jakobsen (eds), The Law of the Sea and Climate Change: Solutions and Constraints, (Cambridge University Press 2021). google scholar
10. Treves, T, ‘Principles and Objectives of the Legal Regime Governing Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction’ in Marinus Publishers, Alex G. Oude Elferink and Erik J. Molenaar (eds), The International Legal Regime of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction: Current and Future Developments, (2010). google scholar
11. Bodansky, D, ‘Advisory Opinions on Climate Change: Some Preliminary Questions’ (2023) 32 Review on European, Comparative and International Law, 185–192. google scholar
12. Bodansky, D, ‘Four Treaties in One: The Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction’ (2024) 118 American Journal of International Law, 1-31. google scholar
13. Bodansky, D, 2017. ‘The Role of the International Court of Justice in Addressing Climate Change: Some Preliminary Reflections (2017) 49 Arizona State Law Journal 1–24. google scholar
14. Craik, N, ‘The Duty to Cooperate in the Customary Law of Environmental Impact Assessment’, (2020) 29 International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 239–259. google scholar
15. Elferink, Alex G. Oude, ‘Governance Principles for Areas beyond National Jurisdiction’ (2012) 27 The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 205–259. google scholar
16. Fitzmaurice M, ‘Legitimacy of International Environmental Law. The Sovereign States overwhelmed by Obligations: Responsibility to React to Problems beyond National Jurisdiction?’ (2017) 77 Heidelberg Journal of International Law 339-369. google scholar
17. Gray, Mark Allan, ‘The International Crime of Ecocide’ (1996) 26 California Western International Law Journal 215–271. google scholar
18. Holst, RJ, ‘Taking the Current when it Serves: Prospects and Challenges for an ITLOS Advisory Opinion on Oceans and Climate Change’ (2022) 32 Review of European, Comparative, and International Environmental Law 217-225. google scholar
19. Jain, T, ‘Transboundary Harm: An Environmental Principle in International Context’ (2008) 7 The Icfai University Journal of Environmental Law 10–22. google scholar
20. Kindji, Kevin and Faure, Michael, ‘Assessing Reparation of Environmental Damage by the ICJ: A Lost Opportunity’ (2019) 57 Questions of International Law 5–33. google scholar
21. Kugler, Noémie Rachel and Sariego, Pilar Moraga, ‘Climate Change Damages, the conceptualisation of a Legal Notion with Regard to Reparation under International Law’ (2016) 13 Climate Risk Management 103-111. google scholar
22. Kumar, V, ‘Transboundary Pollution: a Jurisprudential Analysis’ (2021) 3 Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research 1–27. google scholar
23. Lamm, V, ‘The Obligations of the States regarding Climate Change Before the International Court of Justice’ (2024) 36 Journal of Environmental Law 117–124. google scholar
24. Murillo, J, ‘Common Concern of Humankind and Its Implications in International Environmental Law’ (2008) 5 Macquarie Journal on International and Comparative Environmental Law 133–147. google scholar
25. Song Y, Mao Z and Zhang Z, ‘Strategic Environmental Assessment in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Existing Regimes, Challenges, and Prospects’ (2024) 11 Policy and Practice Reviews, 1-13. google scholar
26. Tigre, MA and Rocha A, ‘Competing Perspectives and Dialogue in Climate Change Advisory Opinions’ (2023) 117 AJIL Unbound 287–291. google scholar
27. Voigt, C, ‘State Responsibility for Climate Change Damages’ (2008) 77 Nordic Journal of International Law 1-27. google scholar
28. Wang, C and Wu M, ‘On the Provisions of the BBNJ Agreement Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change’ (2025) 171 Marine Policy 1–10. google scholar
29. Corfu Channel case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Albania) merits, ICJ Rep. 1949, (9 April 1949). google scholar
30. Obligations of States regarding Climate Change, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 2025, (23 June 2025). google scholar
31. Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia) Judgement, ICJ Rep. 1977, (25 September 1977). google scholar
32. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 1996, (8 July 1996). google scholar
33. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay) (Merits) (2010) ICJ Rep. 14 google scholar
34. Request for an Advisory Opinion submitted by the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law, Advisory Opinion, ITLOS Rep. 2024, (21 May 2024). google scholar
35. Reservation to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 1951, (28 May 1951). google scholar
36. Responsibilities and obligations of States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the Area (Request for Advisory Opinion submitted to the Seabed Disputes Chamber) Advisory Opinion, ITLOS Rep. 2011, (1 February 2011). google scholar
37. Trail Smelter Case (United States, Canada) 3 UN Reports on International Arbitral Awards 1,905 (11 March 1941). google scholar
38. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Climate Emergency and Human Rights, Advisory Opinion, no. AO-32/25, (29 May 2025). google scholar
39. Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (adopted 19 June 2023) UN Doc A/CONF.232/2023/4. google scholar
40. Commentaries on the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001) Yearbook of the International Law Commission, vol II, Part Two. google scholar
41. Convention on the Law of the Sea (adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994) 1833 UNTS 3. google scholar
42. Draft Articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities, with commentaries (2001) Yearbook of the International Law Commission, vol II, Part Two. google scholar
43. Draft articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities, Official Records of the General Assembly, 58th session, Supplement no. 10(A/56/10) (2005). google scholar
44. Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001) UN Doc A/56/10. google scholar
45. Draft Articles on the Allocation of Loss in the Case of Transboundary Harm Arising out of Hazardous Activities (2006) Yearbook of the International Law Commission. google scholar
46. Paris Agreement (adopted 12 December 2015, entered into force 4 November 2016) 3156 UNTS 79. google scholar
47. UNGA Res 77/276 (4 April 2023). google scholar
48. McVey M, ‘The ICJ Advisory Opinion on Climate Change: A Business and Human Rights Perspective’ (Opinio Juris, 4 August 2025) accessed 5 August 2025. google scholar
49. Tigre MA and Carrillo Bañuelos JA, ‘The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion on Climate Change: What Happens Now?‘ (Climate Law Blog, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, 29 March 2023) accessed 26 November 2024. google scholar
50. Wewerinke-Singh M, ‘ICJ Advisory Opinion and the Future of Climate Responsibility’ (IISD SDG Knowledge Hub) accessed 26 December 2024. google scholar