The International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion on Climate Change and its Implication for India

On July 23 2025 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered its Advisory Opinion on the Obligation of States in respect of Climate Change (Advisory Opinion). The Advisory Opinion is significant for climate action in many ways, as it transforms the principle of due diligence into legal obligation for states. The Court held that the framework of international climate law does not exist in silos and imposes an obligation on all states to ensure adaptation and mitigation measures against climate change. The Court then went on to hold that states must use all means necessary to prevent climate harm, in accordance with the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC).  The ICJ also found that states have an obligation under international law to ensure effective protection of human rights by taking necessary steps to protect the climate. This post examines the implications of the Advisory Opinion for India and looks at whether its policies and regulations meet the obligations outlined by the ICJ.

India’s International Obligations and Domestic Policy

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is one of the main international treaties that informs India’s climate governance framework. The UNFCCC, upon ratification, obligates states to stabilise greenhouse gas concentrations to reduce anthropogenic interferences with the climate. The Paris Agreement, also one of the foremost climate frameworks, ratified by India, ensures that these objects are fulfilled through nationally determined contributions (NDCs). NDCs are required to be updated by countries every five years.

India’s NDCs have eight main targets that reflect its commitment to ensure a sustainable way of living, facilitating adaptation to a more climate conscious path. India has recently taken steps to update the NDCs and set the goal of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2070. This is a major improvement as India’s initial goals of 35% reduction in emissions and 40% share of non-fossil fuel based electric power installed by the year 2030 were achieved nine years ahead of the timelines committed. This shows the credibility of India’s climate action. In consonance with these promises, India has a flagship climate change policy called the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) which establishes eight main missions that focus on renewable energy, energy efficiency, sustainable habitats, water conservation, forest protection, sustainable agriculture, Himalayan ecosystems, and climate knowledge, along with the National Solar Mission introduced in January 2010.

These international commitments attain domestic significance through Article 253 of the Indian Constitution that gives the Parliament the power to bring in domestic legislation in consonance with an international treaty or convention. Indian courts have also reaffirmed this and held that domestic legislations can be grounded on an international treaty or convention, as India follows a dualist approach in incorporating international law. As a result, Indian environmental jurisprudence has developed to form a framework where international environmental principles have been actively integrated into decision making by courts. In landmark cases such as MC Mehta v Union of India (Oleum gas leak case), Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v Union of India, and T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India, the Supreme Court incorporated international environmental principles like the public trust doctrine, precautionary principle and polluter pays principle into the domestic ambit where they have served as binding precedent for the evolving environmental jurisprudence of the country.

The Constitutional Foundation and Climate Litigation

Along with the incorporation of international environmental law principles, Indian courts have also relied on constitutional provisions to progress environmental protection. Article 48A, a non-justiciable Directive Principle of State Policy, of the Indian Constitution directs the state to protect and improve the environment. Drawing upon this, the Supreme Court has interpreted Article 21 of the Indian Constitution— which guarantees the right to life and liberty – as encompassing the right to live in a healthy environment. Consequently, any act that causes damage to the ecology, air, water, etc will encompass a violation of Article 21. However, up until recently there have not been any cases explicitly recognising protection against climate change as a right that is protected under Article 21. The ICJ Advisory Opinion becomes domestically significant in this context as it recognizes that climate change could result in substantial human rights violations and could provide significant international support for this position. The recent decision in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India recognised that people have a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change and this is protected under Article 21. The court emphasised that the intersection between climate change and human rights must be put into sharp focus and the state has a duty to take steps to mitigate climate change and ensure that all individuals have the necessary capacity to adapt to the climate crisis.

While the Ranjitsinh case has brought some focus and backing to climate litigation, the Indian landscape surrounding it remains nascent. The establishment of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in 2010 created a specialised forum for environmental disputes the decisions of which have helped the government adopt environmentally progressive policies. However, much of the existing climate litigation has come in the form of Public Interest Litigations (PILs). Though most PILs are filed against the state, the courts have, through their directions, also regulated private industries. Courts have provided directions towards vehicular emission norms and plant relocations on environmental grounds even in cases where there are no statutory mandates.

Private Actor Responsibility

For a long time in international environment law, the responsibility of private actors remained unclear. In its Advisory Opinion [para 95], the ICJ adopted a “broad material scope” to the obligations of states to address climate change. The Court found that states have an obligation to regulate and enforce laws on private actors, and a failure to exercise this duty would lead to an internationally wrongful act [para 428]. Thus, it is important to understand how India regulates private actors with respect to the environment and climate change, while examining the ICJ’s observations on the principle of due diligence and its implications for India.

The Indian legal framework has various mechanisms, statutes, rules and standards to regulate private actors. The Indian Companies Act, the primary legislation in India that governs companies has sections mandating companies of a certain threshold to set aside funds for social responsibility (Section 135 of the Indian Companies Act) to be invested in socially beneficial projects. In addition, the Indian courts have interpreted Corporate Social Responsibility to include Environmental Responsibility, acknowledging that the environment forms an integral part of human society and companies have a non-refutable obligation to the society.

Laws in India impose duties on the Directors of Companies under the Securities and Exchange Board of India regulations. The law holds that directors’ fiduciary duties extend beyond shareholders to the community and the protection of the environment. This duty is to be exercised in good faith, with reasonable care and diligence. Directors who violate their duties can be faced with fiscal penalties. Directors are to consider climate-change related risks while formulating their risk management policies and other reports.

Companies must also file a multitude of disclosures and reports, most of which require environmental disclosures, under Indian law. The Capital Markets regulator of India, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), requires a comprehensive set of disclosures to be filed by companies listed in the top 1000 entities. It requires the top 1000 companies to mandatorily file business responsibility and sustainability reports, while clearly laying down guidelines for information to be included in such disclosures.

Further, SEBI, the Reserve bank of India (RBI) (India’s financial regulator) and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (the companies regulator) are all scaling up requirements and pushing companies to undertake mitigatory steps to reflect global investment trends and standards. For example, SEBI has revamped its rules to now mandate the top 250 companies to report on value chain sustainability performance. It has also introduced sustainability related financial instruments and securities like Social Bonds and Sustainability Bonds to finance emerging sustainable projects.

In addition, Indian Law has a framework to regulate energy consumption and to promote energy efficiency. This is in furtherance of India’s international obligations under the UNFCCC. The central government is empowered to specify a carbon credit trading scheme and to issue credit certificates to registered and compliant entities. Further, the government can notify an energy conservation code for buildings with special emphasis on commercial buildings.

Finaly, companies and their directors face the possibility of litigation with respect to their effects on the environment and climate by way of Public Interest Litigation (or class action suits). The National Green Tribunal and the Special Environment Tribunal can also entertain action or bring action against companies for violations under environmental laws. Companies also face potential litigation from regulators for violating conditions under which they were granted licenses. Lastly, shareholders can collectively bring about a suit against the company and its directors for oppression and mismanagement, alleging that the actions of the company are prejudicial to public interest.

Conclusion

India has a comprehensive framework of legislation, rules and judicial principles to regulate and adapt to climate change. Regulators, the judiciary and civil society have taken proactive measures to respond to the climate crisis. However, the existing legal framework must be integrated and enforced prudently, to ensure India can fulfil its international obligations to the climate and the environment. India, a country with the largest population and the fastest growing major economy, stands at a unique position in its climate action. Despite being a developing country, India has stood at the forefront of innovation and collaboration, incorporating the principle of due diligence. Initiatives like the International Solar Alliance and the One Sun One World One Grid (OSOWOG), show that India has taken responsibility towards climate action in an equitable manner.