June 8, 2026 · In July 2025, the International Court of Justice—the world’s highest court—released an advisory opinion that outlined the obligation of states in addressing climate change.
The advisory opinion affirms two legal obligations: first, that governments must prevent and remedy climate harm, which includes deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions; and second, they must support more vulnerable countries as they adapt to climate change.
“Almost one year after the ruling, one thing is undoubtedly clear: the ICJ advisory opinion is already reshaping the legal and political landscape,” said Atty. Nicole Ponce, co-founder and advocacy lead of World’s Youth for Climate Justice (WYCJ).
Most significantly, the court recognizes that “the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment” is inseparable from other human rights—and is therefore protected under international law.
“In the Philippine context, this may strengthen arguments anchored on the constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology, intergenerational responsibility, and the State’s duty to protect communities from climate-related harm,” said Atty. John Menguito, Executive Director of the Philippine Earth Justice Center.
However, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources has yet to update its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), which would determine how the Philippines plans to reduce emissions and contribute to its legal obligations.
When asked about the status of the NDCs, the DENR told Sustina in an email, “Most of the relevant agencies have already submitted their Certificates of Concurrence (COCs), and the consolidated NDC package is now awaiting scheduling for presentation at the Cabinet meeting.”
Filipinos fighting for climate rights
For Filipino communities most vulnerable to the crisis, the international court’s advisory opinion is a validation of what they have been fighting against for years.
In December 2025, survivors of Typhoon Odette filed a case against Shell Plc in the UK for violating the Filipino people’s right to a clean and healthy environment. It is the first climate justice case against one of the world’s largest contributors to fossil fuel emissions. (Read more: The state of climate litigation in the PH)
Every year, the Philippines experiences an average of 20 typhoons and loses roughly ₱50 billion (or $897 million) to hydrometeorological hazards. In 2021, when Typhoon Rai (locally known as Typhoon Odette) struck the Philippines, it left more than $700 million in damages and displaced thousands of Filipinos in Central Visayas.
Jefferson Chua, lead campaigner of The Odette Case at Greenpeace Philippines, calls the opinion “a symbolic nod” to the responsibility of big businesses to address the harms they have caused by their emissions.
“This should be a wake-up call for states; communities at the frontlines are already doing it, and they are lagging behind,” he said.
What can Filipinos expect from the NDCs?
With the resolution affirming that countries’ obligations to climate change are binding under international law, climate action now becomes “a matter of legal duty and accountability instead of political discretion,” said Menguito.
This turns up the pressure for governments to pursue all available means to address the climate crisis—and to do so swiftly.
Under the Paris Agreement, countries are obligated to submit Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) that outline a state’s action plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These are updated every five years, with the expectation that countries commit to deeper emission cuts than in their previous plans.
“Constitutional rights such as the right to life, human dignity, or a healthy environment can still provide a domestic legal basis for challenging an inadequate NDC for example without relying on international law directly,” Ponce said.
In 2021, the Philippines submitted its first NDC, committing to a 75% reduction in emissions by 2030. The DENR told Sustina that this initial NDC was found to have an “insufficient set of policies and measures to meet the target, limited assessments of mitigation potential, and weak monitoring and tracking mechanisms.”
It aims to ensure that the updated NDC will be “technically robust, implementable, and aligned with national development goals,” and includes “updated sectoral baselines, stronger parameters on conditionality, and more rigorous assessments of mitigation potential.”
“The forestry sector has now been fully integrated, reflecting its central role in both mitigation and resilience. Carbon market opportunities and just transition considerations are being mainstreamed into the technical analyses, ensuring a more comprehensive and future‑ready NDC,” the email said. (Read more: Notes from the Philippine Decarbonization Forum)
When asked about the progress towards achieving 75% emission reduction by 2030, DENR answered that “major policy shifts are underway” and cited renewable energy deployment under the Renewable Energy Act.
“This scale-up will expand the Philippines’ renewable energy portfolio, strengthen long-term power supply reliability, and support national targets of 35% percent renewable energy share by 2030 and 50 percent by 2040.”
The just transition contributes to the global commitment, enshrined in the Paris Agreement, by shifting away from fossil fuels in a way that is fair and inclusive; one that protects workers, communities, and vulnerable populations from economic disruptions caused by decarbonization.
Yet, in Ilocos Norte and elsewhere in the Philippines, renewable energy projects have already threatened to displace local communities, disrupt livelihoods, and encroach on protected areas.
“For countries like the Philippines that are still refining or updating their NDCs, the resolution should encourage governments to treat climate commitments not merely as aspirational political statements, but as part of their broader legal obligations to protect human rights and prevent foreseeable harm,” Menguito said.
The Philippines is among the countries most vulnerable to climate impacts, despite contributing less than 1% of global emissions. This gives the country both moral and legal standing to demand stronger international accountability—one which the advisory opinion formally reinforces.
But what plays out on the local space matters as much, if not more, than what happens on the global stage. “[The Philippines] should also ensure that domestic climate policies are science-based, rights-based, and aligned with climate justice principles,” Menguito said.
