What is the Chile and Colombia Inter-American Court of Human Rights initiative?

What is the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR)? 

Set up in 1979, The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is based in Costa Rica, with a founding purpose of interpreting and applying the American Convention on Human Rights, a treaty ratified by members of the Organisation of American States. Since its founding, 20 States have accepted its jurisdiction. 

What is an advisory opinion? 

An advisory opinion is a legal clarification provided on points and questions of law.

What advisory opinion were Chile and Colombia asking the IACHR for? 

In January 2023, Chile and Colombia requested an advisory opinion from the IACtHR on the impacts of climate change on human rights, as guaranteed under the American Convention. The request acknowledged the human rights effects of the climate crisis, highlighting in particular the vulnerability of communities and ecosystems in Latin America. The two countries flagged the need for regional standards that would accelerate action to tackle the climate crisis. 

Why was this action taken? 

The scientific evidence is clear: the effective enjoyment and realisation of human rights is adversely affected by climate change. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions contribute to climate change and cause foreseeable harms to human rights. So, to prevent these foreseeable harms, States must reduce GHG emissions, and also regulate business actors – because measures taken by States can only be effective if business actors, who are huge contributors to climate change, are regulated. States need to focus on deep, rapid and sustained emissions reductions over greenwashing, unproven and harmful technologies.  

Both Chile and Colombia are experiencing the consequences of the climate emergency, including droughts, floods, landslides and fires. These environmental problems also occur throughout the Americas, and have a significant impact on human rights, in particular the rights of children, women and environmental defenders. 

The effects of the climate crisis are being disproportionately felt by vulnerable communities in the Americas. 

How was ClientEarth involved? 

In December 2023 we submitted an amicus briefing to the IACtHR on this action, as the Court allows for NGO participation in both the written and oral stage.  

Read our full briefing here

What did the advisory opinion say?

On 3rd July 2025, the IACtHR issued its advisory opinion. 

The Court unequivocally decided that governments must do more to address the climate crisis and became the first Court of its kind to require States to tackle climate disinformation. The IACtHR also:

-Confirmed that States are required to regulate and monitor corporate emissions under international law, reflecting the role that businesses play in contributing to the climate crisis. 

-Called on States to put in place measures against climate disinformation.

-Emphasised and strengthened the intergenerational dimension of the climate emergency, as current and future generations will face increased climate impacts while also having to take increased action.

This was a landmark opinion and a huge moment for climate justice. 

What could this positive advisory opinion mean for climate law? 

This action could have major knock-on effects in terms of the understanding of countries’ obligations around climate-harming emissions and human rights. It could open up the possibility that climate commitments legally need to be enforced. 

Domestic and international courts are increasingly being asked to define the exact extent and nature of state obligations to prevent climate change. And as climate change impacts become clearer and come to bear more heavily on the most vulnerable, we are likely to see courts increasingly taking this into account.