Small island nations are pushing for clarity and legal accountability amid a worsening climate crisis.

Leaders from small island nations, highly vulnerable to climate change, have criticised prolonged climate negotiations as they open a maritime court hearing. 

Antigua and Barbuda's Prime Minister Gaston Browne, speaking at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), has called for “legally binding obligations” instead of empty promises.

The move comes as part of a campaign by the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (COSIS), formed in 2021 by Antigua and Barbuda, Tuvalu, and joined by several other small island nations.

These island nations have asked ITLOS to provide a formal opinion on their state responsibilities regarding climate change under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. 

They seek clear legal obligations to protect marine environments from climate change impacts, such as ocean warming, acidification, and rising sea levels.

Prime Minister Kausea Natano of Tuvalu voiced the frustration of vulnerable nations, says that international climate talks have failed to address the necessary far-reaching measures to avert catastrophe. 

Browne said that the tribunal must correct a process that has manifestly failed to address climate change, denouncing the endless negotiations and empty promises.

COSIS members hope that a strong opinion from ITLOS will push governments toward more decisive climate action. Although not legally binding, this opinion could serve as a basis for future lawsuits.

ITLOS, while less known than the International Court of Justice (ICJ), is expected to reach a conclusion sooner, potentially within the next year. 

Experts believe that its opinion could influence other courts, including the ICJ and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which have been asked to provide similar advisory opinions on climate change.

China has challenged ITLOS's jurisdiction, arguing that the UNFCCC is the appropriate channel for addressing climate change, while the UK has cautioned ITLOS to be careful regarding its judicial function and the limited number of states requesting the advisory opinion.

The case is significant as it seeks to clarify existing laws rather than create new ones, addressing the trans-boundary pollution of the marine environment, which raises unique questions in international law. 

A decision is expected in early 2024. The hearing will continue next week, with Australia also set to make a submission before the court.