Huang Weiman: The countrys climate and environmental obligations are ruling by t

In terms of climatic response, there is another more disruptive view that has become more and more common recently, that is, the international community should not put all expectations on the government.If you have obligations, you can change the current situation.

The climate litigation boom spread to Asia, and it seemed to have begun to "burn" to the politicians.

At the end of last month, the South Korean Constitution Court ruled on the litigation of several years of trial, clearly stated that the Korean government was not sufficiently reduced in the climatic response, and thus infringed the rights and interests of the Korean people;A more detailed climate action plan to achieve carbon neutrality.

The significance of this judgment has also surprised many environmental initiatives I know. After all, it is similar to the strategy of "let the court speak for the climate" although it is quite common outside Asia, but it is the first case in East Asia.

To a large extent, this example has given many environmental initiatives who strongly promote the national government to perform greater obligations and formulate more rigorous climate emission reduction targets.It proves that the road of legal lawsuit may win for environmental protection and climate actions, and the practice is suitable for Asia.

In principle, we all know that carbon emissions are accumulated. The more emissions today, the more difficult the stable climate in the future.Political leaders often mention intergenerational responsibility when explaining their climate, that is, do not pass the obligations of climate action to future generations.

However, in terms of specific behaviors and policies, for a long time, we often see that although the national government said that there must be more responsibilities, the average increase in the global temperature in the Paris Agreement has increased its global temperatureIt does not show courage; or to formulate ambitious goals, but delay the actions required to achieve these goals.

The lawsuit in South Korea responded to the "cross -generation" influence of climate issues and the responsibility of the national government.Four joint complaints signed by hundreds of people are the most noticeable in which the lawsuits initiates young people and children and babies represented by their parents.They appealed that due to poor government climate, they violated their survival with future generations and the right to pursue happiness, which caused a serious impact on their lives.

Regarding climate change, the international community has confirmed more and more legal norms in different fields and different forms, as well as different legal obligations of the country and enterprises.However, many media institutions or think tanks that track related development are also regarded as an important "climate litigation year" in 2024.The reason is that in addition to such cases like Korean courts, the international courts are also trying important arbitration cases related to the climate and environment this year. What they want to clarify is also the obligation of the national government.

This series of judgments may change the awareness of the government's perception of climate obligations and increase it from moral obligations to legal level.

For example, in May this year, the International Oceanic Law Court issued the first consultation opinion involving climate change (Advisory Opinion), which ruled that it contaminated the marine environment to the atmospheric greenhouse gas., Reduce and control human -controlled gas emissions, protect ecosystems and marine biological habitats, so that it is exempted from climate change and marine acidification. It also has specific obligations to assist developing countries to solve marine pollution problems.

This consultation opinion should be published on behalf of the climate change of the small island country and the request of the International Law Issues Committee.The impact of climate changes, such as the rise of sea levels, endanger the survival of these countries, therefore the International Oceanic Court has given these countries that are at the forefront of climate change.

Similarly, the United Nations also requests the international court to provide consulting opinions on the obligations of various countries in terms of climate, and encourage all parties to seek bold climate actions.Such consultation opinions can catalyze legal changes and promote the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements.

Interestingly, in terms of climate response, there is another more disruptive view that has become more and more common recently, that is, the international community should not put all expectations on the government.If you have obligations, you can change the current situation.In the past week, I heard the same persuasion and suggestions in two different public places.

One of the pessimists who have expected the country's climate responsibilities are the former senior diplomats in Singapore and Outstanding Researcher Ma Kaishuo, an outstanding researcher at the Asian Research Institute of the National University of Singapore.On Thursday, he rarely delivered a speech on climate responsibility at a sustainable financial forum, which mainly explained the irrationality of Sino -US nations and even general countries in the climate.

He pointed out that if the world is a ship as fast as Titani, then we should find the most powerful helm to lead us through the climate crisis.However, due to the various interests and considerations of geopolitics, as well as the failure of the structural failure of the United Nations and other multilateral organizations, it is difficult to save the earth. He believes that the sinking of Titani is not easy to avoid.

He suggested that some climatic actions from the bottom -to -top, such as the change of personal behavior and the differences of enterprises, are even more critical.

In another forum, a senior environmental judge in Australia also objected to too much power in the process of sovereign state in the process of international climate consultation.He suggested to reshape the international governance framework in order to solve a better plan and channel for climate problems.

The judge explained that the real greenhouse gas emissions are enterprises, especially fossil fuel companies; since these companies can most disturb the climate process, they should not be missing on the negotiating table.

This series of discussions shows that although the state responsibility has become increasingly increasingly a real problem that the international community cannot avoid when talking about climate change, the national responsibility has not yet fully practical feasibility.From a more macro perspective, solving the climate crisis also involves deeper thinking, that is, can the sovereign government make it really allowed us to resolve this century crisis?Not everyone is so optimistic, maybe many people have no answer.

The author is the deputy director of the editorial department of Eco-Business, the editorial department of regional environmental media and consulting companies.