CLA News / Advisory Opinion on the Human Rights Obligations of African States in the Context of Climate Change By Julien Kavaruganda & Patrick Okello
On 2 May 2025, the Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU) submitted a landmark Advisory Opinion request to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR). The request concerns the human rights obligations of African States in responding to the accelerating climate crisis. The matter is currently pending, with the Court yet to schedule hearings or issue directions. According to the Climate Litigation Database,[1] the petition is formally registered and awaits consideration.
Background and Context
PALU’s petition is grounded in a detailed factual record demonstrating Africa’s extreme vulnerability to climate change impacts. It builds on and describes documented regional trends, including severe drought in East and Southern Africa, catastrophic flooding in Central Africa, rising heatwaves in West Africa, and prolonged water scarcity in North Africa. These phenomena threaten numerous rights protected under the African Charter, including the rights to life, health, food, housing, water, development, and a satisfactory environment.
The petition is brought under article 4 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the establishment of an African Court on Human and People’s Rights, rule 82(1) of the Rules of the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights and all enabling provisions of the law. The Court’s advisory jurisdiction derives from Article 4(1) of the Protocol establishing the AfCHPR.[2] PALU has recognized standing based on earlier advisory opinions pronounced in 2018 and 2020, making the request procedurally well-founded.
Summary of the Petition
The petition seeks the guidance of the Court on a series of legal questions concerning the obligations of African States under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights in the context of the climate crisis. Specifically, it requests the Court to consider: whether it can determine the human rights responsibilities of African States in addressing climate change; how Articles 4 (right to life), 16 (right to health), 21 (right to natural resources), 22 (right to development), and 24 (right to a satisfactory environment) of the Charter apply in the context of climate change; and whether States are required to adopt measures for mitigation, adaptation, and resilience to protect these rights. The petition also raises the question of whether these obligations extend to regulating the activities of third parties, including multinational corporations responsible for significant environmental harm, and whether African States have an obligation to cooperate internationally, particularly with historical emitters, to ensure global temperature increases remain below 1.5°C.
Current Case Status
As of April 2026, the Court has not yet issued an Advisory Opinion, and the matter remains pending. However, reports confirm that the proceedings are ongoing with no procedural updates publicly released including whether the Court will invite written submissions or hold public hearings. Drawing from the court’s timeline in dispensing previous advisory opinions, which often take twelve to twenty-four months, it is likely that an opinion may be expected sometime in late 2026 or 2027.
Expected Legal and Policy Implications
If the Court finds in favor of PALU’s reasoning, the Advisory Opinion could have several implications: establish that climate inaction constitutes a violation of multiple Charter provisions; require States to adopt adaptation, mitigation, and resilience measures as part of their human rights obligations; clarify State duties to regulate multinational corporations, especially in extractive and carbon‑intensive sectors; provide protection frameworks for vulnerable groups, including women, children, Indigenous peoples, displaced persons, and environmental defenders; and strengthen Africa’s position in international climate negotiations by affirming that historical emitters owe obligations toward African States. The highlighted implications would significantly influence national climate legislation, regional cooperation, and the integration of human rights in environmental governance.
Conclusion
The Advisory Opinion request before the African Court represents a pivotal moment for climate jurisprudence in Africa. The case consolidates extensive evidence of the continent’s climate vulnerability and urges the Court to articulate binding human rights obligations for States in addressing the crisis. International commentary indicates strong expectations that the Court’s eventual ruling will clarify not only States’ duties but also the moral and legal architecture of climate responsibility in Africa. The matter remains pending, with substantial implications anticipated once the Court issues its decision.
Authors: Julien Kavaruganda and Patrick Okello
About the authors:
Julien Kavaruganda is Vice President Africa of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and
FOOTNOTES:
[1] https://www.climatecasechart.com/document/request-for-an-advisory-opinion-on-the-human-rights-obligations-of-african-states-in-addressing-the-climate-crisis_2579
[2] Article 4 on Advisory Opinions provides as follows:
- At the request of a Member State of the OAU, the OAU, any of its organs, or any African organization recognized by the OAU, the Court may provide an opinion on any legal matter relating to the Charter or any other relevant human rights instruments, provided that the subject matter of the opinion is not related to a matter being examined by the Commission.
- The Court shall give reasons for its advisory opinions provided that every judge shall be entitled to deliver a separate or dissenting decision.
