Colombia’s president Gustavo Petro announced last week that his government will “withdraw from the international investment arbitration system because the courts end up resolving disputes in favor of private entities”.
The move follows an open letter to Petro from 200 international economists – among them Nobel prize winner Joseph Stiglitz and French economist Thomas Piketty – calling for the country to leave the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system to “ensure that it does not stand in the way of its transition away from fossil fuels”.
The ISDS system allows investors – many linked to fossil fuel projects – to sue governments in an international arbitration court over disputes. This mechanism has been used by polluting companies to challenge environmental measures.
“Why do we agree to sign contracts where, in the event of a dispute, it is a private arbitration center in the contractor’s country that ultimately decides whether our country is in the right or not, and, generally speaking, we lose?” Petro said on March 25.
-
British company forces Italy to pay €190m for offshore oil ban
Rockhopper used the Energy Charter Treaty to sue the Italian government for foregone profits and plans to invest the compensation in further drilling -
Governments risk $340bn in legal claims for limiting oil and gas projects, study finds
Investors could use obscure treaties to lock countries into polluting energy systems and delay climate action, researchers warn -
Iran war could boost fossil fuel phase-out push, says Colombian minister
Colombia’s environment minister Irene Vélez Torres said she hopes that a new fossil fuel phase out summit in Santa Marta can cement a coalition of countries
The Colombian president added that several other countries, including the United States, have left or are in the process of leaving this system. In Europe, for example, many governments have started the process of leaving the Energy Charter Treaty, an energy investment mechanism, in an attempt to prevent it from shielding fossil fuel projects.
“I undoubtedly believe we have opened a global debate, not just a Colombian one”, he told an event in Bogota held to launch a report on his government’s economic reforms and their results.
Signatories to the open letter celebrated the move but warned that withdrawing from the system is a complex process and would be easier if it was coordinated with other countries, particularly those in the Global North.
Kyla Tienhaara, Canada Research Chair in Economy and Environment and Associate Professor at Queen’s University, said “it would be preferable for ISDS access to end immediately, which means coordinated action among states.”
She added that such a “coalition of the willing” could set terms on ending treaties in an efficient way, or modify them in a way that removes ISDS protections.
Mario Osorio, Research Fellow at the American think tank Center for Economic Policy and Research (CERP) and also a signatory of the open letter, said in a statement that he hoped that Colombia will now “help to lead other countries in exiting ISDS”, which has “too often stood in the way of needed measures to mitigate climate change”.
High exposure to lawsuits
Harro van Asselt, professor of Climate Law at the University of Cambridge, told Climate Home News that it remains unclear how the Colombian government is planning to cut ties with the ISDS system, but it could include re-negotiating or terminating existing investment agreements.
If the country seeks to terminate treaties – which van Asselt said is the more “nuclear” option – it could trigger so-called “sunset clauses”, which allow investors to still access ISDS for a period of 5 to 20 years after the agreements have been ceased. These clauses can be cancelled if both parties agree to it.
A 2025 paper by researchers at Boston University showed Colombia could be significantly exposed to lawsuits, as an estimated 129 oil and gas projects are covered with ISDS provisions – the most of any country in the Amazon basin.
At last year’s COP30, the country vowed to ban all oil and gas drilling in the world’s largest rainforest, which, if implemented to existing projects, could trigger multi-billion dollar lawsuits, according to the paper. In 2015, neighbouring Ecuador lost a $1.7 billion case with oil major Occidental for ending an oil concession, while Venezuela lost an $8.5bn judgement with ConocoPhillips in 2019 for nationalising oil assets.
The Colombian American Chamber of Commerce, an industry body that promotes American investments in the country, said in a statement that the move away from the ISDS system “deepens uncertainty” for investors. Its president María Claudia Lacouture added that disputes don’t arise from the system itself but from “changing rules, reduced predictability, a lack of institutional coordination, and weaknesses in preventing unlawful harm.”
Several other countries including Indonesia, South Africa, Bolivia and India have moved to cut ties with the ISDS system, while Brazil and Suriname avoided its provisions altogether in their investment deals. Tienhaara said this has not stopped investment in these countries.
However, she added that “it would be easier for Colombia (and other countries in the Global South that might be interested in following this path) if other countries, particularly from the Global North, would support them through an ISDS-free alliance”.
Ramping up support
While it is not the first country to move away from the ISDS system, experts said Colombia has an opportunity to rally other countries to follow their path, as it prepares to host the first Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels in the Caribbean city of Santa Marta.
Van Asselt said that the country sends a “crucial” signal ahead of the conference, suggesting that to move away from coal, oil and gas governments need to look at broader reforms of international finance and investment.
Tienhaara added that “it is excellent that Colombia is showing leadership, but they should not have to”, as the ISDS system was set up by developed countries and international agencies like the World Bank, who should be leading efforts to reform it.
“In many ways, the current situation mirrors that of climate action more broadly – countries in the Global South like Colombia and the Pacific Islands are leading the transition away from fossil fuels when it should be the big polluters in the Global North taking responsibility,” she said.
The post Colombia pledges to exit investment protection system after fossil fuel lawsuits appeared first on Climate Home News.
Colombia pledges to exit investment protection system after fossil fuel lawsuits
After witnessing and hearing stories of Pacific islands’ vulnerability to climate change, senior climate officials have promised to strengthen efforts to limit global warming to 1.5C, despite an expected overshoot, and to help the region adapt to rising seas and other impacts.
More than 30 world leaders, ministers, climate negotiators and international development bankers travelled to the sinking atoll nation of Tuvalu on Tuesday before attending the pre-COP31 talks in Fiji, where schoolchildren told them about the effects warming-driven droughts, heatwaves and storms are having on their education.
Australia and the Pacific nations hoped to use the pre-COP to reinforce the urgency of tackling climate change to the officials from around 50 countries who travelled to the region. Fiji’s climate minister, Lynda Tabuya, told a closing press conference on Thursday they had wanted to “bring decision-makers to the climate frontlines”.
Many of those decision-makers said they had been moved by what they had seen and heard this week, and their speeches emphasised the importance of limiting global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, a key goal of the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
-
Pacific leaders rail at climate finance failures after pre-COP trip to Tuvalu
Island nations seek invest in their own Pacific Resilience Facility, as they struggle with the red-tape of international climate funds -
New Zealand accused of breaching EU trade deal over climate rollbacks
The EU’s climate trade rules face their first major test after a green group alleged New Zealand violated binding environmental provisions under its trade deal with the bloc
In September, a UN report acknowledged that the 1.5C threshold will be breached but said temperatures could still be brought back down to that level by the end of the century with stepped-up climate action.
A month ago, Türkiye‘s COP31 President Murat Kurum told a press conference in the northern Turkish city of Trabzon that limiting global warming to 1.5C “does not really look possible”, adding that “around 1.5C, that will be a success”.
But after seeing the “anxiety” of children and mothers in Tuvalu caused by rising sea levels, Kurum told reporters in Fiji that 1.5C is a “matter of survival – the survival of cultures, history, memories, your homeland, your homes – it’s that important.”
“The 1.5C target is in jeopardy and we do not have a single minute, a single day to lose,” he added through an interpreter.
Jacobo Ocharan, head of political strategies at Climate Action Network International, warned that “words of concern will not protect anyone”. “The Pacific has shown the world what is at stake. Now governments must show they are ready to act,” he said. “[COP31 in] Antalya must deliver decisions that change people’s lives for the better.”
$1.5 billion for 1.5C
In Fiji, Kurum echoed the call of Australia and Pacific nations for contributions to the fledgling Pacific Resilience Facility (PRF), which aims to use the returns on its investments to fund community climate adaptation projects like water storage, building sea walls and protecting homes from storms. “$1.5 billion for 1.5 degrees will save the Pacific,” he said. “It’s that easy. Life will continue in Tuvalu. Children will be smiling again.”
Sitting next to him, Fiji’s Tabuya said she was “encouraged” by his words. “$1.5 billion for 1.5. We will hold COP 31 to that,” she said. The PRF has been promised just under $200 million so far – including about $15 million pledged by European and Pacific governments at pre-COP – and is aiming for $500 million by COP31. It has a longer-term target of mobilising $1.5 billion in capital.
After Pacific leaders on Tuesday aired a litany of concerns about the barriers to accessing the global climate finance system, Kurum joined in at Thursday’s press conference. “Justice in climate finance is essential,” he said. “Resources must reach those in need in a timely and accessible manner, not through a lot of red-tape, and we cannot accept that the same countries should always bear the burden.”
Plan for easier access to climate finance
Australian climate and energy minister Chris Bowen, who is COP31’s president of negotiations, also lamented that “the countries that need the finance the most get it the least”. He said he would ask governments and multilateral development banks to support an access to finance plan for small island states and the world’s poorest nations, launched by Australia on Thursday.
The plan says that while there has been progress in making it easier and quicker to obtain international climate funding, “multiple persistent challenges have continued to limit access to climate finance for developing countries”.
It adds that the amounts available are insufficient to meet climate goals and stresses the need for “grant-based and highly concessional financing”, especially for adaptation and responding to loss and damage. The plan proposes an annual high-level forum on climate finance access to track implementation.
The pre-COP summit closed with an emotional plea from Fiji’s host minister Tabuya. Fighting back tears before finally succumbing, she asked delegates to “carry something of the Pacific with you”.
“Remember the people you met, the stories you heard and why we gathered. This pre-COP draws to a close tonight. Our responsibility does not,” she said to applause.
The post Pre-COP draws attention to Pacific’s climate plight and 1.5C goal appeared first on Climate Home News.
Pre-COP draws attention to Pacific’s climate plight and 1.5C goal
Climate Change
Australia’s climate credibility tested at Pacific Pre-COP talks, as High Court fossil fuel ruling puts government on notice
NADI, FIJI Thursday 8 October 2026 — As the Pacific Pre-COP talks wrap up and Australia prepares to take the reins of COP31 Negotiations in Türkiye next month, Greenpeace Australia Pacific says the government is on notice over fossil fuel expansion and exports, and must accelerate action to align with a 1.5°C pathway.
Following yesterday’s landmark High Court ruling that the climate impacts of coal and gas exports must be considered by New South Wales planning authorities, Greenpeace Australia Pacific is calling on the Albanese government to find the “courage, leadership and grit” to chart a new course away from fossil fuels.
High res images and video from yesterday’s ‘Keep 1.5C Alive’ flotilla in Nadi can be found here
Speaking from Nadi, Shiva Gounden, Head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“The outcomes of this week’s talks are a drop in the ocean given the scale of need, and urgency of the crisis our communities are facing. It is like taking a glass of water to a burning house if we do not urgently act to address the root cause of the existential threat facing Tuvalu, Fiji and all Pacific countries: fossil fuel expansion.
“The Electrification Pledge must end fossil fuel dependence, not be an end in itself — its ultimate success depends on ensuring electricity comes from renewable sources that displace fossil fuels and align with a 1.5°C pathway. It must be underpinned by justice and backed by finance flowing from polluters to communities.
“Limiting global warming to 1.5°C is a non-negotiable survival line for humanity and Australia must act. The landmark climate advisory ruling from the ICJ is clear — 1.5°C is the moral, the scientific and the legal limit. Continuing down the fossil fuel path, and failing to align efforts with limiting warming to 1.5°C, is a breach of our international legal obligations, and risks making Australia liable for future reparations from climate-vulnerable nations.”
Also in Nadi, Dr Simon Bradshaw, COP31 Lead and climate expert at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “The Pacific was never going to be a mere backdrop for Australia in its role as incoming chair of the COP31 climate talks, but where its credibility and commitment to climate leadership would be tested.
“Here we see communities fighting for their survival and doing everything possible to hold the line on returning warming to 1.5°C. When governments profess to take their concerns seriously, only to then throw more fuel on the fire, the pain and sadness is visceral.
“This week the High Court of Australia recognised what the Federal Government refuses to — that Australia is responsible for the climate damage of our fossil fuel exports and if governments don’t act, the courts will intervene. The message is simple: this is not someone else’s problem, it is ours.
“We must now follow other countries in developing a national roadmap away from fossil fuels that ensures a managed wind-down of fossil fuel production, including exports, in line with our legal obligation to help return warming to 1.5°C.”
ENDS
Media contact: Kate O’Callaghan in Nadi on +61 406 231 892 (Whatsapp/Signal)
A Dutch NGO has filed the first climate complaint under the European Union’s trade rules, arguing that New Zealand violated the environmental provisions of its free trade agreement with the bloc by weakening its climate regulations.
The case will test whether binding climate provisions in the EU’s free trade deals can be enforced to hold governments accountable to their climate obligations, experts told Climate Home News.
The EU-New Zealand free trade agreement, which came into force in 2024, was the first in the world to include legally-binding climate provisions and possible sanctions for violating them, as the EU seeks to use its trade partnerships to advance greater environmental protection.
Under the deal, both parties committed not to weaken their environmental law to promote trade or investment and to “refrain from any action or omission that materially defeats the object and purpose of the Paris Agreement”.
-
International trade linked to 20% of global emissions – but imports ignored
Researchers say governments should discuss how to tackle emissions linked to globally traded goods and services, especially in large importing countries
At the time the agreement was signed, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the agreement included “unprecedented social and climate commitments”. But experts warned it was unclear how the Paris Agreement provisions would be enforced.
The EU included a similar “trade and sustainable development” clause in 14 other bilateral trade deals in recent years, with several others, including with China, awaiting ratification or being negotiated.
Climate activists at the Dutch NGO Both ENDS argue that the New Zealand government breached these terms by reopening its waters to offshore oil and gas exploration, releasing a climate plan that barely requires any emissions reductions, and passing a law that prevents corporations from getting sued over climate damages.
“Here, we have a so-called gold standard for free trade agreements with sustainability provisions but we have a trading partner that is doing exactly the opposite: regressing, as all the evidence points to, away from the Paris Agreement,” said Marius Troost, a senior policy advisor at Both ENDS.
Can the EU enforce its climate trading rules?
The Dutch environmental group filed the complaint under the EU Commission’s Single Entry Point, a mechanism that allows civil society to request enforcement of the bloc’s trade commitments.
The EU-New Zealand trade deal includes the possibility of suspending beneficial trading arrangements between the two parties in response to serious violations of its climate provisions. This, Troost said, is a “unique” tool to enforce both parties’ obligations under the deal.
“This is an opportunity for the EU and New Zealand to show that they are actually serious about these commitments,” he told Climate Home News.