iisdvideo 74d ago

The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) historic advisory opinion has sent a clear message: climate action is a binding legal obligation, not a discretionary choice. But what does this mean for international investment governance? Our expert Lukas Schaugg breaks down the legal implications of the ICJ’s opinion and explores how it can move the dial on investment treaty reform. Aligning investment governance with 21st-century public priorities requires four concrete steps: 🔹 Exclude fossil fuel investments from treaty-based investor-state arbitration through bespoke climate "carve-outs." 🔹 Regulate the award of damages to prevent tribunals from giving excessive payouts to fossil fuel companies while ignoring the reality of stranded assets. 🔹 Terminate outdated investment treaties and neutralize "sunset clauses" that continue to protect coal, oil, and gas for years after a treaty ends. 🔹 Pursue a systemic overhaul of the international investment regime to ensure it supports—rather than hinders—the green transition.