1/🧵To my non-Spanish-speaking colleagues: A quick thread on the new Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) on Climate Emergency and Human Rights. A landmark moment for climate law in Latin America & the Caribbean.👇

2/ A. Reinforced due diligence: the new baseline The Court elevates the duty of prevention: States must act with reinforced due diligence on climate risks—guided by the best available science and the urgency of harm. (¶231–238)

4/ Stricter oversight for high-risk sectors (fossil fuels, cement, agribusiness). This gives teeth to the polluter pays principle and opens the door to CSDDD/CSRD-style laws—but with climate-specific obligations and a stronger role for state oversight.

5/🌱B. A right to a healthy climate The Court recognizes an autonomous human right to a “healthy climate”—understood as a climate system free from dangerous, human-induced interference. (¶299–303

6/⚖️C. Equity and differentiated obligations The reinforced duty is shaped by common but differentiated responsibilities (UNFCCC Art. 3.1). → Developing states are not exempt—but cooperation is key. (¶237)

7/ → Domestic targets (NDCs) must integrate intra- & intergenerational equity (¶324–327) → Within sectors, actors with greater responsibility or risk must bear greater burdens (¶350) 🎯 A just allocation of climate burdens becomes a legal imperative.

8/ This aligns climate justice with practical burden-sharing tools: → Finance → Technology → Loss & damage → Cooperation A boost to LAC's position at future COPs.

9/D. Nature as a legal subject The Court embraces a post-anthropocentric view: → Nature, including the climate system, is a subject of rights (¶284–286) → Irreversible harm to the environment is prohibited under jus cogens (¶287–294)

10/ This validates: → Rights-of-nature frameworks (e.g., legal personhood for rivers) → Public-interest litigation to protect ecosystems → Stricter scrutiny of projects affecting vital carbon sinks