Judicial and Similar Proceedings

1. 1. His Majesty the King in Right of Ontario v. Sophia Mathur, a minor by her litigation guardian Catherine Orlando, et al. (Supreme Court of Canada – May 1, 2025)

   <https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-l-csc-a/en/item/21002/index.do>

   On May 1, 2025, the Canadian Supreme Court rejected an appeal by the Government of Ontario in a youth-driven climate case in which seven youth plaintiffs brought a constitutional challenge to the Government’s lack of action with respect to climate change. As reported by JURIST, the plainfiffs argued that Ontario’s use of Section 16 of the 2018 Cap and Trade Cancellation Act to modify the 2016 Climate Change Mitigation and Low-Carbon Economy Act resulted in a watering down of the requirments in the Climate Change Act and effectively subjects youth and indigenous communities to dangerous and arbitrary levels of CO2 emissions. They seek an order declaring that their rights under sections 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms have been violated. The Ontario Court of Appeal concluded in October 2024 that government climate change targets must comply with the Charter and affirmed that the government’s actions are putting people at risk. The refusal by the Supreme Court to take the appeal confirms the judgment of the Court of Appeal means the case will return to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, which had previously dismissed the plaintiffs’ application.

Resolutions, Declarations, and Other Documents

1. 1. Hungary Announces Withdrawal from International Criminal Court (April 3, 2025)

   <https://x.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1907748120496161163>

   On April 3, 2025, Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orbán announced Hungary’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC). The announcement was made during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was visiting Hungary at the time.

   The decision was made in response to the ICC’s issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli officials. On November 21, 2024, the Court issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes. As a state party to the Rome Statute, Hungary is obligated to cooperate with the ICC. However, Orbán denounced the Court’s actions as a “witch hunt” and expressed Hungary’s solidarity with Israel.

   Under Article 127 of the Rome Statute, a state’s withdrawal takes effect one year after the date of the receipt of written notification submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Most importantly, a state’s withdrawal does not affect obligations that arose while it was still a party to the Rome Statute. Accordingly, Hungary remains bound by its legal obligations under the Rome Statute until the withdrawal takes effect and even afterward with respect to acts committed before the date of withdrawal.

   Later on April 3, 2025, the Presidency of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute expressed concerns regarding Hungary’s decision. It emphasized the ICC’s role in promoting global accountability and highlighted that Hungary’s existing legal obligations will remain unaffected. The Presidency urged Hungary to reconsider its decision and remain a party to the Rome Statute.

   While the withdrawal is unlikely to have legal consequences concerning the ongoing ICC investigations, it raises serious concerns about the future of state cooperation with the Court, the erosion of international criminal accountability, and the overall effectiveness of global justice mechanisms.

US Vetoes UN Security Council Gaza Ceasefire Resolution (June 4, 2025).

<https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/06/1164056>.

On June 4, 2025, the United States vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an “immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire” in Gaza and for the “immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.” The resolution received support from 14 of the Council’s 15 members but failed to pass due to the US exercising its veto power under Article 27 of the UN Charter. As reported by JURIST, US Representative Dorothy Shea defended the veto, stating that the US “would not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas and does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza.”.

Hamas condemned the US veto, calling it a “green light for war criminal Netanyahu.” The observer of the State of Palestine denounced what he called “engineered starvation” of the Palestinian population and questioned whether the Security Council has anything to say about Israel breaking the fundamental rules of international law and “of basic humanity,” asking: “Does that mean Israel can continue its destruction of the Gaza Strip—and all life within it—while the negotiations continue?”.

The veto occurred amid continued violence in Gaza, with the International Committee of the Red Cross reporting its highest single-day casualty count of 179 weapon-wounded patients at its Rafah field hospital on June 3, 2025. The incident highlights ongoing tensions around humanitarian aid distribution, with reports of Palestinian casualties at aid centers operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a US-backed organization established in 2025 to replace UN-led aid systems. The UN has criticized Israel’s restrictions on humanitarian aid and accused it of using food as a weapon in the conflict. According to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, approximately 500,000 people in Gaza currently face starvation, with tens of thousands of children at risk of acute malnutrition. The US veto is not the first time Washington has blocked Gaza ceasefire resolutions since the current conflict began.