ONE-third of Pakistan was submerged underwater during the summer of 2022.
The country’s most visceral reminder yet was the displacement of thirty-three million individuals and the billions in infrastructure damage. Climate change is no longer a distant threat; it is a lived catastrophe. Nevertheless, Pakistan’s legal and institutional capacity to demand and deliver climate justice is alarmingly inadequate, despite its grievous vulnerability. Pakistan’s contribution to global greenhouse emissions is negligible, with a value that falls below one percent. However, it is unfortunate that it is one of the ten countries that are most susceptible to climate-induced disasters. In recent years, the persistent surge of toxic smog that has engulfed Lahore and other urban centres, as well as floods, droughts and glacial melt, have transformed climate change into a multidimensional crisis. It is a crisis that affects justice, sovereignty and survival, in addition to the environment.
Smog, in particular, has emerged as a silent murderer. It gradually poisons entire populations, particularly the urban impoverished, in contrast to sudden floods or droughts. Despite the fact that Lahore’s AQI rankings are now comparable to those of Beijing and New Delhi, legal action remains fragmented, reactive and limited. Victims receive inadequate compensation and recognition in the absence of a unified legislative framework for environmental accountability. This is the precise divide that climate justice is intended to address.
The expression “climate justice” encompasses more than just environmental protection. It acknowledges the unequal burden that vulnerable communities bear and demands legal accountability for both state failure and environmental damage. Nevertheless, Pakistan’s legal framework is inadequate to effectively enforce this principle. Although the Climate Change Act of 2017 established a Climate Change Council and Authority, neither entity has demonstrated proactive engagement with transboundary environmental hazards or compensation mechanisms for victims. The volume of their silence during the 2022 floods and accompanying smog crisis is significant.
Certainly, there are indications of judicial awakening. The Lahore High Court in the seminal case of Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan (2015) acknowledged climate change as a fundamental threat to the constitutional rights of citizens under Articles 9 (life) and 14 (dignity). The court established a Climate Change Commission and instructed the government to execute its climate policy. Although it was a significant decision, it was an isolated one. The Commission was never able to establish the institutional muscle necessary to follow up on such precedent and it discreetly faded from public discourse.
In contrast, India has established the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which has heard thousands of cases, including those concerning industrial emissions, river pollution and air quality. Bangladesh has also contributed to the advancement of climate justice by establishing a Climate Resilience Fund and promoting legal activism through community-led environmental litigation. Pakistan has not made comparable development. There is no specialized tribunal with a cross-border mandate and our courts lack consistent jurisdiction on environmental cases. Enforcement remains inadequate and public interest litigation is inconsistent.
Pakistan’s dependence on India-controlled headwaters is perilous, as it is a lower riparian state. Formal disputes under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) have already been initiated by projects such as the Kishanganga and Ratle dams. The 2013 Kishanganga Arbitration, which was conducted at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, provided partial relief by mandating that India maintain minimum water volumes. However, the fundamental issue remains unresolved. This fragile legal framework is further burdened by climate-induced water variability.
Pakistan must recognize that in the future, water disputes may not be restricted to the interpretation of treaties; they may also encompass climate-related flows, environmental damages and even ecological compensation discussions. In order to achieve this, the nation requires a legal strategy that is climate-ready, which encompasses hydrological data, international environmental law and access to international arbitration forums such as the PCA and ICSID.
Neighboring states have established a comprehensive diplomatic and legal framework to address climate-related disputes, as evidenced by its assertive participation in the International Solar Alliance and its increased attendance at climate conferences. Conversely, Pakistan has been reactive and frequently absent. There have been no Pakistani-led initiatives on climate arbitration or shared climate governance in regional forums such as SAARC or ECO. Pakistan critically requires the establishment of a National Climate Justice Commission (NCJC), a permanent, independent entity that is authorized to hear environmental grievances, including transboundary claims; engage in collaboration with international arbitration forums; suggest mandatory enforcement measures for all ministries.
Pakistan must proactively utilize Article IX of the Indus Waters Treaty to seek third-party adjudication whenever upstream actions by India raise environmental or ecological concerns in order to reclaim its position as a lower riparian state at the diplomatic level. The 2005 Iron Rhine Arbitration (Belgium v. Netherlands) is instructive in this regard, as the tribunal successfully reconciled historical treaty obligations with contemporary environmental law, demonstrating how older agreements can be modified to accommodate current climate conditions.
Furthermore, Pakistan should suggest the creation of a South Asian Climate Tribunal under SAARC or SCO, an idea that has not yet been explicitly proposed. This tribunal would serve as a forum for the resolution or adjudication of regional disputes regarding air pollution, water sharing and climate change. The path to climate justice in Pakistan is both lengthy and intricate; however, the consequences of inaction are already increasing. The indications are evident, ranging from the disappearance of rivers to the poisoning of the air. Climate change is no longer solely a matter of weather; it is a matter of national survival, equity and the law. Pakistan will soon be legislated by catastrophe if it fails to enact climate justice legislation.
—The writer is a International Law expert with a rich experience in negotiation, mediation and Alternate Dispute Resolution.
