Unpacking Key ICJ Questions on Climate Obligations On December 13, 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concluded the hearings of the advisory proceedings on State obligations in respect of Climate Change. During the two weeks of the hearings, 96 States and 11 international organizations presented oral arguments before the Court in The Hague. On the last day of the hearings, judges posed four questions to participants to be answered within a one-week timeframe. The Judges enquired about State obligations in relation to fossil fuels; the interpretation of Article 4 of the Paris Agreement; the content of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment; and the significance of declarations made by some States on becoming parties to the UN climate treaties– questions going to the very heart of some of the most controversial issues that arose during the hearings. This blog post will provide a brief exploration of the first two questions and issues raised. Phasing out fossil fuels Judge Sarah Cleveland highlighted that several Participants had referred to the climate change impacts of fossil fuel production and corresponding referred international obligations of States. Indeed, during the proceedings, several States, including Tuvalu , Vanuatu , Bangladesh , the African Union , and the Melanesian Spearhead Group , presented arguments on this issue – including arguments that, under international law, States must phase out fossil fuels as cessation of wrongful conduct and terminate all subsidies to this industry. In opposition, a minority of States, including Saudi Arabia , Egypt , and China , took issue with this position, highlighting the dangers this would pose for their economies. In this regard, Judge Cleveland asked , “What are the specific obligations under international law of States within whose jurisdiction fossil fuels are produced to ensure protection of the climate system […]