Barbados has urged the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) to acknowledge obligations for compensating climate change damage, declaring that international laws mandate such measures.
The IACHR is being asked by Chile and Colombia to provide an advisory opinion on state obligations surrounding the “climate emergency” based on submissions from across the Americas. Barbados is among 62 delegations making submissions during the landmark three-day hearing, at the University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus, which is examining the links between climate change and human rights obligations under the American Convention on Human Rights. The hearing will continue with a second round next month in Brazil.
Opening the proceedings, Director General in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade Donna Forde highlighted the existential threat climate change poses to Barbados, especially the historic fishing village of Oistins.
“Everything that Oistins represents, from our past, present, and future is at risk of disappearing because of climate change,” she said, noting the vulnerability of Barbados’ tourism-dependent economy.
Representing Barbados, the government’s long-time international legal consultant Robert Volterra argued the obligations under the American Convention include mitigating climate change, adapting to its effects, providing individual remedies, and “the obligation on states whose conduct contributed to climate change to provide restitution to states that did not contribute”.
Volterra said that failing to identify the restitution obligation would render the advisory opinion “effectively meaningless for the people of the resource-deprived developing and smaller states of the Americas, particularly small island states”.
He called it a potential “rich person’s climate change advisory opinion” that would “abandon” countries like Barbados to “suffer the consequences…on their own.”
Citing international laws prohibiting environmental damage to others, the international law attorney reinforced the need for compensatory measures, saying Barbados’ concern is shared by many nations facing an existential climate threat.
Volterra highlighted three potential benefits if the court recognises compensation obligations related to climate change. First, it could lead to the integration of climate restitution into projects funded by the Organisation of American States (OAS) and entities like the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). Secondly, it may facilitate more favourable outcomes for developing states in international climate change negotiations.
Thirdly, the court’s opinion on obligations to compensate for climate harm “will undoubtedly be carefully considered by other international courts and tribunals that are currently also considering these issues,” Volterra stated. This indicates the advisory opinion could have a wider impact on global jurisprudence surrounding environmental protection and climate justice.
In his submission to the court, the attorney repeatedly emphasised that existing principles of international law prohibit states from allowing their territory to be used in ways that cause environmental damage to other nations.
While urging recognition of compensation duties, Barbados also stressed the urgency of addressing climate impacts on small, disproportionately affected countries through robust legal frameworks. (SM)
