- With the publication of Advisory Opinion OC‑32/25 on Climate Emergency and Human Rights, the Inter‑American Court of Human Rights establishes a historic precedent that strengthens States’ legal obligations to prevent climate-related harm and guarantee rights—including the right to a healthy environment and climate, access to environmental information, effective participation and consultation, access to justice, the right to defend rights, enhanced protection for vulnerable groups, and recognition of common but differentiated responsibilities among countries.
- CEJIL played a key role in promoting and shaping this Advisory Opinion by providing technical support to Chile and Colombia, coordinating participatory processes involving over 1,500 people, and submitting five substantive briefs to the Court.
- This Advisory Opinion marks a turning point for the region: it solidifies a legal framework guiding States to align their climate policies with human rights and strengthens the tools available to civil society, affected communities, and judicial systems.
Washington, D.C., July 3, 2025 — In a historic step toward a more just, equitable, and timely response to the climate crisis, the Inter‑American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter, the Court) today released Advisory Opinion 32/25 on “Climate Emergency and Human Rights” (AO32) to provide a more just, equitable, cooperative, and timely response to the climate crisis. The Advisory Opinion establishes a binding legal framework for States to address the climate emergency from a human rights perspective.
Requested by Chile and Colombia, with technical and strategic support from the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), this Opinion represents a milestone in the development of international human rights law. For the first time, the Court recognizes the climate crisis as a direct, urgent, and structural threat to the fundamental rights of individuals and peoples, clarifying the reach of a range of fundamental rights in response.
AO32 outlines an ambitious, transformative legal roadmap, grounded in scientific evidence, directing States on how to meet their international obligations regarding the climate emergency. It goes beyond addressing the impacts of climate change by also emphasizing prevention and mitigation grounded in human rights, integrating this perspective into all public policies, and strengthening regional and international cooperation.
As an authoritative interpretation of the American Convention on Human Rights and other international treaties, AO32 is legally binding on all Member States of the Organization of American States (OAS). The Court’s doctrine of conventionality control reinforces this legal force by obligating all branches of government—Executive, Legislative, and Judicial—to align their laws, policies, and decisions with the Convention, including the guidelines set out in this Advisory Opinion.
In the words of the Court’s President, Judge Nancy Hernández, the process and analysis showed there is no more room for indifference, as “the current situation indeed constitutes a climate emergency […] increasingly affecting and seriously threatening humanity, especially the most vulnerable.”
In response to the requesting States’ questions, the Court establishes key criteria for addressing the climate emergency with a human rights perspective and introduces novel elements, including:
1- Incorporation of interpretive principles within the human rights framework—such as pro natura, intra- and intergenerational equity, common but differentiated responsibilities, and cooperation—rooted in the pro persona principle.
2- Development of States’ duty to step up mitigation and adaptation efforts to address the causes of climate change, especially regarding greenhouse gas emissions, including corporate regulation under enhanced environmental and human rights due diligence and the establishment of ambitious mitigation targets.
3- Protection of the human right to science and the recognition of local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge, requiring States to use the best available science and ruling out claims of ignorance.
4- The right of people and communities to access environmental information that enables effective participation; and the duty of States to prevent misinformation and false climate information.
5- States’ obligations to produce, publish, and facilitate access to clear, truthful, accessible, and timely environmental information, detailing causes and effects of climate change, and goals and measures implemented to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.
6- Recognition of the right to a healthy climate as part of the right to a healthy environment and a central avenue for comprehensive protection of humanity and nature.
7- Obligations for States to recognize and protect environmental human rights defenders, including special protection duties: avoiding illegitimate restrictions; collecting data on threats; designing prevention strategies; implementing protection programs; ensuring defenders’ participation; and strengthening institutional capacity to investigate, prosecute, and remedy impunity.
8- Differential protection for children, adolescents, Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant communities, rural populations, and fishermen.
9- Recognition of common but differentiated responsibilities among States, considering their capacities, contributions, and specific needs to achieve sustainable development.
10- Recognition that anthropogenic actions causing massive, irreversible damage to the climate and environment constitute a peremptory norm (jus cogens) of general international law.
11- Linking the rights to a healthy environment and climate to the protection of democratic rule and public participation as essential foundations for climate action.
Since 2020, CEJIL has led this process as part of its commitment to a rights-based, effective, and just response to the climate crisis. In 2022, we collaborated with the governments of Chile and Colombia on the technical design of the request and actively participated in the Court’s open process—with support from IGSD. Together with experts, social organizations, and defenders, CEJIL submitted multiple briefs and organized collaborative processes with over 1,500 individuals, communities, and organizations—including scientists, children, youth, environmental defenders, and representatives of directly affected peoples—to ensure their effective participation in shaping the Opinion.
This has been one of the most participatory processes in the Inter‑American system’s history: in 2024, public hearings were held in Bridgetown (Barbados), Brasília, and Manaus (Brazil), featuring over 260 written submissions and 150 oral presentations from States, international bodies, academic institutions, Indigenous peoples, rural communities, and civil society. This unprecedented engagement not only enriched the Court’s legal analysis but also bolstered the legitimacy and urgency of its decision.
As a result, AO32 is now the most relevant legal and policy roadmap guiding States toward adopting public policies for climate prevention, mitigation, and adaptation aligned with human rights. It also strengthens the tools available to civil society, affected communities, and national judiciaries.
At CEJIL, we reaffirm our commitment to effectively implementing this Advisory Opinion and to recognizing the Inter‑American System as a vital instrument for protecting human rights amid the climate crisis.
“Through this Advisory Opinion, Inter‑American law delivers a fundamental contribution toward a just, equitable, timely, and solidarity-based response to the climate emergency. Today we celebrate it; starting tomorrow, we unite efforts to implement it across the continent.” — Viviana Krsticevic, Executive Director of CEJIL