The Pacific Elders’ Voice (PEV) has welcomed the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) historic advisory opinion on climate change, describing it as a turning point for international climate justice and a powerful validation of years of Pacific advocacy.
In a statement, PEV praised the leadership of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change (PISFCC), a movement launched by law students at the University of the South Pacific’s Vanuatu campus.
“Their advocacy, outreach and unrelenting support for climate justice and a safer, more equitable world for future generations represent the strength and vitality of the Pacific in the 21st century,” the Elders said.
They also commended the Government of Vanuatu for backing the legal push that has now “transformed climate change into a global, human rights issue.”
PEV reiterated its long-held position that climate change, driven by human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, is “the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of the peoples of the Pacific, and to human communities worldwide, particularly the poorest and most vulnerable.”
“Pacific Island Countries (PICs) are among the most climate vulnerable nations on earth, facing the most severe consequences of climate change – consequences that will only worsen in years to come,” the statement said.
“These impacts of climate change are now also affecting the human rights of people everywhere. Most basic rights, such as those to life, health, water, sanitation etc. are among others that are being impacted as a result of climate change. Addressing these impacts is a matter of survival.”
The ICJ’s ruling affirms that the right to life and a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment are fundamental human rights. It also confirms that the 1.5°C global warming limit is not aspirational—but a legal obligation.
PEV said the decision gives Pacific communities hope, especially in contrast to a recent ruling by Australia’s Federal Court, which dismissed a climate case from Torres Strait Islanders, arguing that emissions policy is a matter for Parliament, not the courts.
“Australia’s hypocrisy and incoherence were particularly obvious when on the one hand it acknowledged that ‘Climate change poses the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of the peoples of small island states, including Pacific Island states,’ but on the other argued that further legal obligations should not extend beyond what was covered by international climate treaties such as the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement.”
The Elders said the ruling raises questions about how Australia expects continued Pacific backing for its bid to co-host COP31 in 2026, while it undermines Pacific survival and the principles of the Boe Declaration, to which it is a signatory.
The ICJ opinion also vindicates submissions made by Small Island Developing States and others calling for greater legal accountability for climate inaction. It opens the door to new avenues for legal redress, human rights protection, and emissions cuts under international law.
“The Court has provided a roadmap for people and Governments to seek the transformative change and accountability we need in the fight against climate change, now and in the future,” PEV said.
