| Sumario: | Climate litigation within the international judicial system has emerged as a central arena of global climate governance. This article examines climate cases across international judicial fora. Alongside the invocation of legal norms, strategic climate litigation increasingly deploys rights-based and postcolonial narratives while relying on binary 'victim–perpetrator' narratives to justify judicial intervention. As much as the strategic combination of narrative framing and legal techniques has facilitated certain successes, its construction of 'climate victims' and 'climate perpetrators' through rights-based and postcolonial frames exposes the limitations of international adjudication in addressing the climate crisis. Rights discourse expands access to standing and links climate claims to identity politics and intergenerational justice, but it also risks expanding the scope of judicial intervention and invites challenges grounded in cultural and institutional diversity. Postcolonial narratives situate climate change within broader patterns of historical and economic injustice, yet claims for accountability continue to face obstacles under existing frameworks of state responsibility. Overall, climate litigation both shapes understandings of climate change and influences the trajectory of climate governance, while simultaneously revealing the limits of orthodox approaches to and understandings of the law. Responding effectively to the climate crisis, therefore, requires an expanded legal imagination that moves beyond the confines of current judicial approaches.
|
|---|