Building a Corpus Iuris Climatis : Making Sense of the ICJ and the IACtHR Advisory Opinions on Climate Emergency

Climate change is the justice challenge of our century, and the increasingly serious impacts of climate change on human societies and ecosystems are raising important international legal challenges. States and stakeholders are appealing to international courts for clarity concerning their responsibilities in the global response to climate change, as well as their accountability for climaterelated loss and damage. Through advisory proceedings, these institutions are being asked to clarify the legal obligations of States in addressing climate change, including the prevention of ocean impacts, the protection of human rights, and in international law more broadly. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are at the forefront of such proceedings with the potential to reshape international climate law and governance. In this article, expert legal scholars highlight the significance of climate advisory proceedings in these tribunals, briefly underlining the legal reasoning of the ITLOS advisory opinion, its implications for international climate governance, and the questions and arguments before the IACtHR and the ICJ. The article explores, in the context of global efforts to implement the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and other climate litigation including in international courts and tribunals, the transformative potential of recent advisory opinions sought from the ITLOS, the IACtHR and the ICJ. In their responses to the pressing need for legal clarity in a world grappling with unprecedented climate challenges, the article suggests, courts are offered an historic opportunity to shape the contributions of international law to global sustainability, justice and the survival of life on Earth.

The Nuremberg tribunal was the expression and the beginning of states' recognition of their duty to prosecute genocide and other gross human rights violations. It was a first step towards fulfillin...

Resumen: Este artículo examina cómo los procesos consultivos se han convertido en un mecanismo de participación y acceso a la justicia climática para los defensores de intereses de las generaciones futuras. En la primera parte, se analizan los fundamentos normativos de la protección intergeneracional desde el marco de la sostenibilidad y los derechos humanos. En la segunda parte, se estudia la cuestión desde la perspectiva práctica, el rol de los actores no estatales en los procesos consultivos sobre cambio climático ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia (CIJ) y la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CtIDH). Esta sección analiza el caso del movimiento World Youth for Climate en el marco de la CIJ y el uso del mecanismo de Amicus Curiae ante la CtIDH. Finalmente, se plantean reflexiones sobre el grado de participación y el impacto potencial de estas iniciativas para ampliar el espectro de protección de intereses de las generaciones futuras desde los derechos humanos frente a la crisis del cambio climático. Abstract: This article examines how advisory proceedings have become a mechanism for participation and access to climate justice for advocates of the interests of future generations. The first part analyzes the foundations of intergenerational protection in response to the human rights crisis caused by climate change. In the second part, the issue is studied from a practical perspective: the role of non-state actors in advisory proceedings on climate change before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). This section examines the case of the World Youth for Climate movement within the ICJ framework and the use of the Amicus Curiae mechanism before the IACtHR. Finally, reflections are offered on the degree of participation and the potential impact of these initiatives to broaden the spectrum of human rights protection of future generations in the face of the climate change crisis. Palabras clave: Derechos Humanos. Cambio Climático. Futuras Generaciones. Actores no Estatales. Keywords: Human Rights. Climate Change. Future Generations. Non-State Actors. Índice: 1. Introducción 2. Fundamentos de la protección intergeneracional ante la crisis climática 2.1. El cambio climático: una crisis de derechos humanos 2.2. El desarrollo sostenible y su conexión con los derechos humanos desde una perspectiva intergeneracional 3. Oportunidades de acceso a la justicia climática de las futuras generaciones en procesos consultivos sobre derechos humanos: una mirada hacia el movimiento climático juvenil y los amicus curiae 3.1. World Youth for Climate Justice: el movimiento transnacional que intenta redefinir el acceso de actores no estatales ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia 3.2. El amicus curiae ante la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos: su contribución a la transformación del acceso a la justicia para las futuras generaciones 4. Conclusiones 5. Bibliografía Index: 1. Introduction 2. Foundations of intergenerational protection in the face of the climate crisis 2.1. Climate change: a human rights crisis 2.2. Sustainable development and its connection to human rights from an intergenerational perspective 3. Opportunities for access to climate justice for future generations in advisory proceedings on human rights: an approach to the youth climate movement and amicus curiae 3.1. World Youth for Climate Justice: the transnational movement that seeks to redefine the access of non-state actors before the International Court of Justice 3.2. The amicus curiae before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: its contribution to transforming access to justice for future generations 4. Conclusions 5. Bibliography

Activists in international courts: Backlash, funding, and strategy in international legal mobilization

The ICTs as the Climate Change Sentinels: Three Advisory Opinions & Beyond

This article reviews the most important cases decided by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights between 2021 and 2023. The Court has introduced important changes in the understanding of legal concepts of Inter-American law that will significantly impact the region. The authors of the article provide an overview of the jurisprudence of the In-ter-American Court of Human Rights on the following range of issues: 1) transitional justice; 2) the right to the protec-tion of human rights and the right to informational self-determination; 3) the right to a healthy environment; 4) the right to freedom of expression; 5) sexual and reproductive rights; and 6) the obligations of businesses to respect hu-man rights irrespective of one’s sexual orientation. It is noted that the right to the protection of human rights and the right to informational self-determination have been recognized by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for the first time. The Court also resolved the issue of the status of human rights defenders by including in this category not only lawyers, but also paralegals, technical and administrative staff, members of the press and political scientists. In ad-dition, the Court has recognized the responsibility of the State for violations of the human right to a healthy environ-ment, as well as specified the State’s obligations in relation to mining activities that may have an impact on the envi-ronment. In decisions on cases involving violations of the right to freedom of expression, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has clarified the special nature of the protection to be guaranteed to journalists, in particular women journalists, and has also pointed out the special obligations of States to protect the rights of indigenous peoples in rela-tion to their access to radio broadcasting. In the authors’ view, these and other landmark decisions presented in this review demonstrate that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights is committed to the progressive development of inter-American law. The categories of issues addressed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights presented in this article indicate directions for the evolution of the system of regional human rights protection in the Americas.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ (IACtHR) advisory opinion on the environment and human rights (Advisory Opinion), which was released on 7 February 2018 (in Spanish only), is the latest and potentially most significant decision in a series of high-profile international judicial rulings that acknowledge legal consequences for environmental harm.1 It not only recognizes the right to a healthy environment as being fundamental to the existence of humanity, but it also has the potential to unlock real cross-border remedies for the victims of environmental degradation. This decision is not an isolated development but, rather, a reflection of an important current trend that we refer to as the rise of international environmental law in international dispute resolution. As recently as 2 February 2018, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordered Nicaragua to pay compensation to Costa Rica for environmental damage in Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v Costa Rica), its first-ever order for compensation for environmental harm.2 The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, for its part, issued a landmark provisional measures order not long ago in Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire in the Atlantic Ocean (Ghana/Côte d’Ivoire), whereby the tribunal prescribed provisional measures to prevent serious harm to the marine environment, inter alia, suspending all ongoing oil exploration and exploitation operations in the disputed area.3 To that list, one could add the 2017 decision of a tribal sitting under the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes in Burlington Resources, Inc. v Republic of Ecuador to award approximately US $39 million in damages in favour of Ecuador for environmental remediation costs.4

Jo M. Pasqualucci provides a comprehensive critique of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which is at once scholarly yet practical. She analyzes all aspects of the Court's advisory jurisdiction, contentious jurisdiction, and provisional measures orders. When relevant, she compares the practice and procedure of the Inter-American Court with that of the European Court of Human Rights, the International Court of Justice, and the United Nations Human Rights Committee. She also evaluates the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court and the Inter-American Commission, which entered into force in May and June of 2001 and bring about important procedural changes in the inter-relationship of those organs. In addition, she cites the effectiveness of the Convention and the Court's rulings in the domestic law of the States Parties to the Convention. This book will provide an important resource for scholars, practitioners, and students of international human rights law and practice.

This paper analyzes the issue of treaties over time and the interpretations of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in this context. Parts 1 and 2 introduce the elements of treaty interpretation in general international law, providing criteria for the application of the evolutionary approach to treaty interpretation, the debate between the application of evolutive interpretation and the use of subsequent conduct. Part 3 addresses the issue of fragmentation in international human rights law, and through the case law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, provides evidence for the application of the rules of general international law to interpret the American Convention on Human Rights. Finally, conclusions are extracted on the basis of the case law analyzed, contrasting the Court’s application of the American Convention over time, the conclusions of the International Law Commission Reports on the Fragmentation of International Law in 2008, and the preliminary conclusions of the Study Group on Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice concerning treaty interpretation and the issue of the passage of time.

This article evaluates the judicial dialogue between the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). It aims to discuss, on the one hand, the use of the ICJ jurisprudence in the case law of the Inter-American Court and the use of the IACtHR jurisprudence in the case law of the ICJ, on the other hand. Being aware that the ICJ and the IACtHR are placed in different levels and possess structural differences, the judicial dialogue between these two courts is inevitably marked by asymmetries. The empirical analysis of the interaction between the ICJ and the IACtHR aims to identify the functions of the judicial dialogue, which encompass the general cross-fertilization function and the function of enhancing the persuasiveness, authority or legitimacy of individual judicial decisions.

Sonia Picado, First Woman Judge On The Inter-American Court of Human Rights Jo M. Pasqualucci (bio) I. Introduction Sonia Picado, the first and only woman judge on the Inter-American Court of Human Rights [hereinafter the Inter-American Court or Court] has resigned her position on the Court to become the Costa Rican Ambassador to the United States, a position that is statutorily incompatible with a judgeship on the regional court. 1 Judge Picado has dedicated her career to public international law and especially to international human rights law. In 1993, she was awarded one of the prestigious United Nations Human Rights awards for “Extraordinary Efforts in [the] Protection and Promotion of Human Rights.” 2 The honorary award recognized Judge Picado as a “major promoter of human rights in the [Latin American] region.” 3 Judge Picado has made contributions to human rights and to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights as both a scholar and a woman. Her presence and her perspective will be missed. [End Page 794] II. Personal Background Sonia Picado was the oldest of three children born to Antonio Picado and Odilie Sotela de Picado. Her father, the youngest magistrate to be named to the Costa Rican Supreme Court, was one of the predominant influences in her life. Antonio Picado, who became well known in Costa Rica for his honesty and his dedication, was the eighth of nine children born to a poor family in a small Costa Rica town. His mother, like so many other Latin American women, struggled to take care of her large family without much help from her husband. When young Antonio won a scholarship to study in the capitol of his province, the town’s people took up a collection to buy him clothes and shoes. The image of her father in his struggle to better himself and to lift his family above poverty had a tremendous effect on Sonia Picado’s life. “He taught me that the least that I could do in life was to try to see that others have the same opportunities that I’ve had.” 4 One of Antonio Picado’s favorite sayings was, “hands that give are always full.” 5 This, according to Sonia Picado, influenced her to give priority to causes that in one form or another could help people. 6 Young Sonia spent two of her formative high school years studying in the United States. At the Holton Arms, an all girls’ school in Washington D.C., 7 she was taught that an academic education is important for women as well as for men. Women’s education at that time in Costa Rica focused on languages, music, and art, rather than basic sciences, history, and courses that would prepare young women to work outside of the home. After completing high school in Washington, Sonia wanted to remain in the United States to complete her university studies, but she complied with her parents’ wishes and returned to Costa Rica. Like many girls in Latin America, Sonia married young and soon had a child. She refused, however, to give up her dream of attending a university. After the birth of her first daughter, she insisted on beginning her university studies in law—an undergraduate degree in Costa Rica. In the 1960s it was very unusual for a woman, especially a married woman, to study at the university. There was only one other woman in Sonia Picado’s class. Although it would have been much more convenient for her to drive to class, her husband would not allow her to go to the university in an [End Page 795] automobile, because it would not be appropriate for a woman. Instead she awoke at 5:00 a.m. to take care of home responsibilities before taking an early bus across town. She studied half time so that she could make a good home for her family. Nevertheless, shortly after the conclusion of her studies, she found herself the divorced mother of two children. Sonia Picado was in the first class of students who voluntarily performed legal services while attending law school. A year of legal assistance in areas such as criminal, labor, and family law has...

International law governing the settlement of disputes through law-based forums, such as courts, tribunals and arbitral tribunals, is fraught with limitations that are becoming especially apparent with respect to disputes that involve the protection of the environment. However, despite the deficiencies of the law, international courts and tribunals have issued judgements in disputes involving the protection of the environment. At the global level, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) have handed down decisions in relevant cases. In addition, other legal forums can also be called upon to decide cases involving international environmental law. Such forums include the Environmental Chamber of the ICJ and the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) under its general facilities and under the Environmental Facility that it is planning to establish. Similarly, special bodies, such as the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), may decide on cases. Moreover, regional forums such as the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Community (ECJ) have ruled on cases involving international environmental law. Despite the these developments, calls for the establishment of an international environmental court at the global level persist. Several arguments have been advanced to justify the establishment of an international environmental court, for example the very many pressing environmental problems that exist today and the need for a bench consisting of experts in international environmental law to consider these problems, the need for individuals and groups to have access to environmental justice at the international level, the need to enable international organizations to be parties to disputes related to the protection of the environment and the need for dispute settlement procedures that enable the common interest in the environment to be addressed. Arguments against the establishment of an international environmental court have been advanced as well. This publication explores the arguments for and against the establishment of an international environmental court, examining topics such as the definition of an international environmental dispute and the concomitant expertise required on the bench, fragmentation and its root causes, access to justice and the representation of community interests. The author argues that the establishment of an international environmental court is not the most desirable option and she suggests that it might be more fruitful if we consider developments in environmental law, as well as in other relevant areas of international law, from a different perspective, namely, that of administrative law, and reassess the relationship between international and national law. Such an approach, she argues, is warranted if, inter alia, viable means for resolving environmental disputes that may arise are to be identified.

The Inter- American Court of Human Rights has developed an interpretative approach in recent years that considers all international instruments that deliver protection to human beings as part of the same legal system, that is, the corpus juris of international human rights law. Consequently, different branches of international law, such as international humanitarian law, refugee law, consular relations and – of course – human rights law, have been interpreted and implemented as part of the same undivided and unique legal system that provides protection to individuals against arbitrariness and potential abuses attributable to States. This paper critically analyzes and deconstructs the interpretative methods used by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its contentious and advisory jurisdictions. It focuses on how this Court has broadened or expanded the scope of protection afforded in international human rights instruments and norms by interpreting them in light of the principle pro homine, which places the human person at the centre of international law. In this sense, this paper endeavours to contribute to a better understanding of international human rights law by means of unveiling the interpretative steps taken by the Inter-American Court in its efforts towards the humanization of contemporary international law.

The International Courts Project, M.W. Janis. Part 1 The classical universal institutions: peaceful settlements of disputes, L.B. Sohn the Hague peace conferences of 1899 and 1907, D.J. Bederman the international court, M.W. Janis the Hague Permanent Court of Arbitration, W.E. Butler inter-state arbitration since 1945 - overview and evaluation, C. Gray and B. Kingsbury. Part 3 The regional international courts: the Court of Justice of the European Communities and the prospects for international adjudication, J.W. Bridge the European Court of Human Rights, M.W. Janis the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, C.M. Cerna. Part 3 Specialized international tribunals and procedures: the glorious past and uncertain future of international claims tribunals, D.J. Bederman the mandatory component in the CSCE dispute settlement system, K. Oellers-Frahm the case for an international court of criminal justice and the formulation of international criminal law, J.W. Bridge international legal aid - the Secretary General's trust fund to assist states in the settlement of disputes through the International Court of Justice, M.E. O'Connell the Law of the Sea Tribunal, M.W. Janis.

Transitional justice refers to the set of judicial and non-judicial measures adopted by different countries in order to confront their dictatorial past. In practice, countries adopt different transitional policies according to their own political, legal, social, historical, and cultural traditions. This applies, for example, to Latin American countries, some of which enacted amnesty laws currently in force, while others tried and convicted those responsible for human rights violations. In this process, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has contributed significantly to the progress of transitional justice. Through its jurisprudence, the Court has enshrined fundamental principles related to transitional justice. In addition, it has helped Latin American countries overcome jurisprudential positions and revoke national laws that contradict international human rights standards. This article examines the contribution of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to the development of transitional justice, with an emphasis on the case of Brazil. Ultimately, it assesses the impact of selected court jurisprudence on Brazil in order to identify the quality of the existing dialogue on transitional justice between the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court.