This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
Last week was the deadline of the ICJ, or the United Nations court also known as the world court, for UN member states to file their submissions, or make their positions known about the current request for an advisory opinion. Philippines invoked the ‘polluters must pay’ principle, and said “while the principle is not explicitly referred to in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement, many of the provisions and obligations stated therein point to the evidence that said principle is being applied.”
The US is a key Philippine ally. But in this regard, the Philippines disagreed that climate change is a purely a diplomatic issue that one can only resolve through political means. “We have to demonstrate that green economies are job creators, green economies are good for the economy, they can stimulate economic development,” Ware added.Experts predict that if the ICJ decides an oral hearing, it will be by the end of this year or next year. The best case scenario is the ICJ issuing an advisory opinion that States can be legally held accountable for their acts or omissions that destroy climate system.
Ware believes that the ICJ’s decision would not be that extreme, saying that “the court could only be going from moderate to fantastic, how close we get to the fantastic is what we’re looking at.”