Indigenous Peoples and Climate Justice: Advisory Opinion 32/25 of the INTER-American Court of Human Rights and the Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Obligations of States in relation to Climate Change

This paper explores how two 2025 Advisory Opinions, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ OC-32/25 and the International Court of Justice’s opinion on climate change, address indigenous peoples’ rights. Both recognise climate change as an existential threat but adopt contrasting approaches. The ICJ portrays indigenous peoples as vulnerable communities, without differentiated standards. Conversely, the IACtHR promotes a pro persona perspective, incorporating environmental democracy into its climate reasoning, recognising eco-anxiety, and equating indigenous knowledge with scientific evidence. Through comparative and critical analysis, this paper argues that while the ICJ reinforces universal obligations, the Inter-American Opinion operationalises them, providing stronger protection for indigenous identity and territorial rights.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Age of Human Rights Journal
Published
2025-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17561/tahrj.v26.9818
Primary Topic
Environmental law and policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Indigenous Peoples and Climate Justice: Advisory Opinion 32/25 of the INTER-American Court of Human Rights and the Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Obligations of States in relation to Climate Change

Maria del Angel Iglesias
The Age of Human Rights Journal
Environmental law and policy
article

Indigenous Peoples and Climate Justice: Advisory Opinion 32/25 of the INTER-American Court of Human Rights and the Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Obligations of States in relation to Climate Change

Maria del Angel Iglesias
article en

Abstract

This paper explores how two 2025 Advisory Opinions, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ OC-32/25 and the International Court of Justice’s opinion on climate change, address indigenous peoples’ rights. Both recognise climate change as an existential threat but adopt contrasting approaches. The ICJ portrays indigenous peoples as vulnerable communities, without differentiated standards. Conversely, the IACtHR promotes a pro persona perspective, incorporating environmental democracy into its climate reasoning, recognising eco-anxiety, and equating indigenous knowledge with scientific evidence. Through comparative and critical analysis, this paper argues that while the ICJ reinforces universal obligations, the Inter-American Opinion operationalises them, providing stronger protection for indigenous identity and territorial rights.

The Age of Human Rights Journal(26)
Universidad Internacional De La Rioja (ES)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Environmental law and policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Indigenous Peoples and Climate Justice: Advisory Opinion 32/25 of the INTER-American Court of Human Rights and the Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Obligations of States in relation to Climate Change — Maria del Angel Iglesias · The Age of Human Rights Journal (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS