The International Court of Justice has held that fossil fuel exporters like Australia can't export their responsibility for climate change.
The landmark advisory opinion, released overnight in the Hague, states 'obligations pertaining to the protection of the climate system do not rest exclusively with consumers and end users, but also include activities such as ongoing production, licensing and subsidising of fossil fuels.'
In its submissions, the Australian government argued that complying with the Paris Agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was all that international law required and Australia had no relevant obligations when it came to exporting fossil fuels.
But the advisory opinion states 'the Court considers that the argument according to which the climate change treaties constitute the only relevant applicable law cannot be upheld.'
"The world court says fossil fuel supplying nations like Australia can't export their climate responsibilities," said the Australian Conservation Foundation's general counsel Adam Beeson.
"Our initial analysis of the decision indicates the Australian government will need to properly account for, assess the consequences of and potentially transition away from exporting fossil fuels to meet its international obligations – something ACF and others have been urging for many years."
ACF and the Mackay Conservation Group are presently in the Queensland Land Court, challenging Whitehaven's proposed Winchester South coal mine.
On Monday this week Whitehaven Coal told the Queensland Land Court: 'to assess emissions that occur somewhere else is contrary, in Whitehaven's submission, to global… policy.'
"Whitehaven's position appears to contradict the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion that climate action obligations do not rest solely with end users, but also include the producers of fossil fuels," Mr Beeson said.
The ICJ advisory opinion states:
[427]… Failure of a State to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from GHG emissions — including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies — may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that State.
[428]… a State may be responsible where, for example, it has failed to exercise due diligence by not taking the necessary regulatory and legislative measures to limit the quantity of emissions caused by private actors under its jurisdiction.
