A sea-change does not always announce itself as a tsunami. On July 23, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a watershed opinion that nations failing to curb climate change may be violating international law. For Small Island Developing States (SIDS) impacted by rising seas and hurricanes, this was not just legal interpretation; it was long-overdue recognition. And for the Caribbean region, a moment of vindication, our homelands too often dismissed by powers abroad as climate’s canary, but now standing as its conscience.

Led by the Pacific nation of Vanuatu and backed by over 130 countries, a legal request to the ICJ posed two questions: What are States legally obliged to do to prevent climate harm? And what are the consequences if they fail?

The court responded forcefully, ruling that climate inaction may constitute an “internationally wrongful act”; additionally, it affirmed that a “clean, healthy and sustainable environment” is a human right.

Though non-binding, the opinion sets a new legal precedent with global implications. It gives moral force and legal shape to what our Caribbean homelands, and other SIDS, have long argued: that climate change is neither a technical issue, nor a charitable cause. Instead, it is a question of rights to life; to land; and to our children’s future.

The ruling affirms that countries responsible for greenhouse gas emissions have legal obligations to prevent harm, and to support those who are already suffering. As Bahamas Prime Minister Philip Davis declared, “This decision confirms what we have long advocated – that climate change threatens the most fundamental human rights of Bahamians”; and, indeed, many other nationalities.

For years, our Caribbean leaders have pleaded for action in global climate forums, with destructive hurricanes like Dorian and Beryl offering brutal testimony. Now, the ICJ has given these lamentations judicial weight. As Bahamas Attorney General Ryan Pinder declared, “This is not charity – it is a legal obligation.”

Importantly, the ICJ connected climate obligations with human rights law. Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves of St Vincent and the Grenadines highlighted this shift, noting obligations under climate treaties are not just procedural; that they are “substantive legal obligations”.

The ICJ’s message is thus quite clear: countries that pollute must act, or face legal consequences. Among the consequence are the potential for reparations, domestic lawsuits, and more forceful negotiation positions for climate-vulnerable nations.

It is not only future emissions that are at stake. As the Center for International Environmental Law’s Nikki Reisch noted, the ICJ “rejected the attempts of the biggest cumulative emitters … to sweep history under the rug”. States are now accountable for both past and ongoing harm, and our homelands in the Caribbean have direct evidence, which has been lived through for many decades.

It can be argued that the ICJ’s opinion lacks leverage for enforcement; that it cannot compel China, the US, and Saudi Arabia to slash emissions. But the point here is legal transformation rarely begins with the power of a tsunami, but clarity. Thus the ICJ’s opinion comes with lifting leverage for SIDS in climate talks, in lawsuits, and in diplomacy.

Moreover, the decision joins a rising tide of climate jurisprudence. From the European Court of Human Rights to the Inter-American Court, a legal consensus is emerging that climate justice is a matter of human rights. The ICJ’s opinion fortifies this narrative shift, offering SIDS new leverage in multilateral fora such as COP30.

In the real world, there remains resistance, with some developed nations already casting doubt on the ruling’s impact. But as our Caribbean people and our leaders know too well, this global progress started with our homelands speaking truths to powers that did not wish to listen.

Now the tide of jurisprudence is rising, and as members of the diaspora, and our Caribbean people, we must keep leveraging collective shoulders with coordination, strategy, and resolve. As Gonsalves said, “[The ICJ] has given us an excellent platform. We have … to follow through with some heavy lifting.” Like the tide, our voices too must rise.