In a landmark advisory opinion issued Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) urged member states to strengthen cooperation on climate change and avoid actions that undermine environmental protection. The opinion, though non-binding, emphasised the legal and ethical responsibilities of both states and corporations in responding to the climate crisis.
Requested by Colombia and Chile, the advisory applies to the 20 countries under the court’s jurisdiction in Latin America and the Caribbean. It asserts that states must regulate and monitor corporate activity—especially from industries that produce significant greenhouse gas emissions—and ensure companies adopt effective climate action measures.
The court also called on governments to combat “greenwashing” and undue corporate influence in shaping climate policies and regulations. States must enact laws requiring businesses to practice due diligence regarding human rights and climate change impacts across their entire value chains.
Additionally, the court stated that governments should set binding and ambitious emission-reduction targets with clear timelines. Climate cooperation, the opinion noted, must extend beyond border-related harms and should encompass comprehensive efforts across mitigation, adaptation, and broader systemic responses to the climate emergency.
Maria Antonia Tigre, director of global climate change litigation at the Sabin Center at Columbia Law School, highlighted the opinion’s weight. “The IACHR is a unique body because its opinions often guide domestic court decisions,” she said, noting that regional supreme courts frequently cite such rulings as precedent. “If a contentious case arises, the judgment will likely align with this advisory opinion,” she added.
In 2024, the IACHR ordered Peru to compensate a mining community, referencing principles from a 2017 opinion that declared access to a healthy environment a human right. That decision reflects a broader global trend of increasing climate litigation, with individuals, civil society, and governments turning to the courts for climate accountability.
Similar judgments have emerged elsewhere: the European Court of Human Rights ruled that government inaction on climate change violates human rights, and South Korea’s constitutional court found its climate laws inadequate for protecting future generations. Meanwhile, Vanuatu has asked the U.N.’s top court to rule on the legal responsibilities of states in addressing climate damage—an eagerly awaited judgment expected later this year.
The IACHR noted that climate litigation, though still developing, has become an essential instrument for enforcing climate obligations and holding states and corporations accountable.
Reuters/s.s