Submission to the OHCHR Call for Inputs: Addressing the Challenges of the Human Rights of the People of the Marshall Islands Stemming from the State’s Nuclear Legacy
1. Just Atonement Inc. (JAI) is a law non-profit that trains planetary defenders to address threats to human rights, a livable planet, and the international rule of law.
2. JAI provides this submission in relation to the Call for Inputs: Addressing the challenges and barriers to the full realization of the human rights of the people of the Marshall Islands stemming from the State’s nuclear legacy.
3. JAI specifically addresses these questions: (1) how justice can be pursued for the impacts of nuclear testing on the environment, people, and future generations; (2) the role of international cooperation, including regional initiatives, in supporting justice mechanisms and identifying effective approaches to financing such efforts; and (5) additional information, examples, and recommendations to support efforts aimed at achieving justice for the human rights impacts of nuclear legacies.
I. Compound Legacy Sacrifice Zones: Interrelated Harms and State Obligations
4. At a high level, JAI argues that the concept of a “sacrifice zone” (defined below) should expand to encompass aCompound Legacy Sacrifice Zone, which JAI argues applies to areas facing the threefold harms of (i) environmental degradation (such as historic nuclear testing), (ii) the climate crisis, and (iii) racial injustice rooted in colonial histories. A Compound Legacy Sacrifice Zone requires unique solutions tailored to such an unprecedented—and devastating—phenomenon. JAI concludes that the concept of a Compound Legacy Sacrifice Zone applies in the context of the Marshall Islands.
5. The concept of “sacrifice zone” was first delineated during the Cold War, describing areas made uninhabitable by nuclear testing.[i] Today, the term has been further and separately applied to climate-impacted regions where rising seas, extreme heat, and ecological degradation expose already marginalized communities to life-threatening harm.[ii]
6. The impacts of sacrifice zones, and the ongoing and accelerating effects of climate change, are disproportionately borne by racially marginalized and formerly colonized peoples, including Marshallese and Indigenous groups, who were historically “sacrificed” to nuclear proliferation.[iii] In other words, climate change, combined with racial marginalization and other historic environmental degradation, is now expanding these sacrifice zones, augmenting their impacts through long-term health consequences, displacement, denial of self-determination, and human rights violations.
7. International law affirms State responsibility for internationally wrongful acts,[iv] the duty to prevent foreseeable harm to the environment,[v] the right to a healthy environment,[vi] the right to self-determination,[vii] and the obligations to prevent discrimination[viii] and promote equal rights.[ix] The following sub-sections examine breaches of these obligations in the context of Compound Legacy Sacrifice Zones, now giving rise to an urgent duty to act under international law.
A. Nuclear Sacrifice Zone Duty, Rights, and Breach
8. The nuclear legacy in the Marshall Islands has created a sacrifice zone due to the United States having conducted 67 nuclear tests, exposing Marshallese communities to extreme radiation without their consent and causing physical and psychological harms that continue to this day.[x] This constitutes a breach of international obligations related to the environment and human rights. Nuclear testing caused lasting contamination, health risks, and displacement of vulnerable communities. Affected individuals hold rights to life,[xi] health,[xii] a clean, healthy and sustainableenvironment,[xiii] cultural identity,[xiv] and remedy.[xv] These substantive obligations impose duties on nuclear States to prevent harm to the environment, ensure reparation for breaches of obligations, and guarantee non-repetition. Accordingly, this nuclear sacrifice zone represents not only historical injustice, but an unresolved violation of international law.
9. Despite awareness of radiation risks at the time, nuclear testing continued with (1) limited understanding of long-term exposure, (2) failure to warn or evacuate communities, and (3) inadequate follow-up care after known contamination. These failures show a clear disregard for the health and safety of the Marshallese people.
10. International law requires States to avoid serious or irreversible harm to the environment, particularly under conditions of scientific uncertainty, and consistent with the customary no-harm rule as affirmed in the recent advisory opinion on climate change from the International Court of Justice (ICJ).[xvi]
B. Climate Change Harms
11. Climate harms amplify the legacy of nuclear testing, which has weakened the health, land, and resilience of affected communities. In the Marshall Islands, nuclear contamination rendered areas uninhabitable, displacing people onto fragile atolls and damaging critical ecosystems. Inadequate clean-up has deepened vulnerability to climate-induced sea-level rise and environmental degradation.[xvii] These intersecting harms have produced extreme and novel vulnerability, compounding and amplifying adverse consequences.
12. Sea-level rise implicates the right to self-determination by forcing displacement from ancestral lands, undermining territorial integrity, and threatening permanent sovereignty over natural resources.[xviii] All States have a duty to protect and promote the self-determination of the Marshallese people under international law.
13. States have stringent due diligence obligations to prevent significant harm to the environment from climate change.[xix] States are also obligated to cooperate by helping affected countries mitigate climate harm and adapt, including through funding, technology, and resilience support.[xx]
C. Racial and Systemic Discrimination Harms
14. International law imposes the obligations to promote the equal rights of peoples as well as anti-discrimination within States.[xxi] These duties have been breached in the Marshallese context, where racially marginalized communities were exposed to nuclear harm without consent or protection.[xxii] These communities were disproportionately exposed to nonconsensual nuclear harm, which has now persisted across generations, resulting in entrenched poverty, health disparities, displacement, and cultural loss. The lack of formal harm recognition and inadequate reparations forthese injustices have further undermined the ability of future generations to thrive and maintain continuity of identity and territorial integrity. These harms have fallen along racialized lines of vulnerability.
II. Comprehensive Remedies for Nuclear, Climate, and Structural Injustice
15. The combined harms of nuclear legacy, climate change, and racial injustice in Compound Legacy Sacrifice Zones reveal a global systemic failure to meet a wide array of international legal obligations. A comprehensive justice response grounded in cessation, non-repetition, and reparation is needed. This section provides concrete recommendations with respect to each of these elements.
A. Cessation and Non-Repetition
16. First, States must take immediate steps to halt ongoing environmental, health, and social damage in the Marshall Islands.[xxiii]
17. To fulfill the obligation of cessation and guarantee non-repetition, the United States must commit to preventing future nuclear harm and respecting Marshallese land and sovereignty. This includes ratifying the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty,[xxiv] establishing independent safety audits to assess ongoing risks, and declassifying all records related to nuclear testing to support Marshallese-led historical and educational efforts. The United States must secure the Runit Dome against radioactive leakage worsened by rising sea levels, and ban hazardous activities such as dredging and other military operations.[xxv]
18. In the context of climate change and racially disparate impacts, cessation and non-repetition require more than general mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions (which, in itself, is already urgently needed). Cessation demands an immediate end to environmental harm at its source, including the continued expansion of the fossil fuel industries driving sea-level rise and planetary degradation. Non-repetition requires structural transformation: States must enact enforceable laws that protect historically marginalized communities, guarantee their free, prior, and informed consent, and criminalize environmental exploitation and experimentation that disproportionately impact vulnerable groups.
19. Among other things, this could include the adoption of an ecocide law, aligning domestic enforcement with evolving international norms. Non-repetition also requires long-term investment in public education that addresses the racialized dimensions of climate and environmental harm, and institutional reforms that place affected communities at the center of decision-making. Legal commitments must be put in place to ensure the equal rights of peoples and to address longstanding forms of discrimination based on race.
B. Reparations
20. The Marshallese have previously called for redress of nuclear legacy injustice through enforcement of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,[xxvi] enforcement of past and future awards of the Nuclear Claims Tribunal, environmental rehabilitation, and truth and reconciliation supported by declassification of documents for educational purposes.[xxvii] While the 2024 Compact of Free Association with the United States provides funding, it does not fully reflect the scope of reparations sought by the Marshallese.[xxviii]
21. Restitution, an essential component of reparation, requires restoring conditions as far as possible to the status quo ante.[xxix] In the context of Compound Legacy Sacrifice Zones, this requires placing the Marshallese in a development paradigm where they would have been absent the negative and adverse interference caused by the triple-fold harms identified herein, including nuclear clean-up efforts, the return and long-term protection of land threatened by sea-level rise, and investment in sustainable development to empower Marshallese communities, as partially recognized in the Compact of Free Association.[xxx]
22. Compensation must be clearly defined, not ex gratia, and truly compensatory based on measurable harm.[xxxi]Compensation must not be provided with “strings attached.”
23. Satisfaction may include a formal apology by the United States, full declassification of nuclear testing records, and a Marshallese-led truth and reconciliation process that can also address the climate crisis and racially disproportionate impacts on historically marginalized communities.
[i] UN Human Rights Council, ‘The right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment: non-toxic environment: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy, and sustainable environment’ (12 January 2022) UN Doc A/HRC/49/53, para 26.
[ii] ibid para 27.
[iii] UN Human Rights Council, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance: Ecological Crisis, Climate Justice and Racial Justice’ (25 October 2022) UN Doc A/77/549 para 18.
[iv] International Law Commission, Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries (2001) (“ILC ARS”) UN Doc A/56/10.
[v] Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change (Advisory Opinion) [2025] ICJ [393].
[vi] UN Human Rights Council, ‘The human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment’ (6 October 2021) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/48/13; Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change (Advisory Opinion) [2025] ICJ [393] https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/187/187-20250723-adv-01-00-en.pdf.
[vii] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171 (ICCPR) art 1; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3, art 1; Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (adopted 24 October 1970) UN Doc A/RES/2625 (XXV) (“Friendly Relations Declaration”), Principle V.
[viii] ICESCR (n 7) arts 2(2); ICCPR (n 7) arts 2(1), 26.
[ix] International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (adopted 21 December 1965, entered into force 4 January 1969) 1965 UNTS 195; Friendly Relations Declaration (n 7) Principle V.
[x] UN Human Rights Council (n 1) para 35.
[xi] Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948), GA Res 217A (III), art 3; ICCPR (n 7) art 6.
[xii] ICESCR (n 7) art 12.
[xiii] UN Human Rights Council Res 48/13 (n 6)
[xiv] ICESCR (n 7) art 15
[xv] UNGA, ‘Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law’, UN Res 60/147 (16 December 2005), UN Doc A/RES/60/147.
[xvi] Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change (n 5) [138], [274].
[xvii] Don’t Bank on the Bomb Scotland, Nuclear and Climate Injustices: The Marshall Islands (2022) <https://nukedivestmentscotland.org/nuclear-and-climate-injustices-the-marshall-islands/> accessed August 4, 2025.
[xviii] Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change (n 5) [357].
[xix] ibid [138].
[xx] ibid [140].
[xxi] Friendly Relations Declaration (n 7) Principle V; ICERD (n 10).
[xxii] UNHRC, Nuclear Testing and Radiation Exposure in the Marshall Islands (A/HRC/57/77, 2024) paras 43-6, 52
[xxiii] ILC ARS (n 4) art 30(a).
[xxiv] Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (adopted 10 September 1996, not yet in force) UN Doc A/50/1027.
[xxv] US Department of Energy, Runit Dome Technical Assessment Report (DOE 2013).
[xxvi] Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v UK)(Memorial of the Marshall Islands) (16 March 2015) ICJ <https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/160/160-20150316-WRI-01-00-EN.pdf>.
[xxvii] See Republic of the Marshall Islands and National Nuclear Commission, Reply to Call for Inputs of the Special Rapporteur on Toxics and Human Rights: Access to Justice and Effective Remedies in the Context of Toxics (17 March 2025), OHCHR <https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/toxicwastes/cfis/justice-remedies/subm-access-justice-effective-sta-republic-marshall-islands-ssion.pdf>.
[xxviii] Agreement between the United States of America and the Republic of the Marshall Islands with Annex (signed 16 October 2023, entered into force 1 May 2024) <https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/24-501.2-Marshall-Islands-Regional-Issues-to-Amend-1.pdf>.
[xxix] ILC ARS (n 4) art 35.
[xxx] Amended Compact of Free Association (n 28).
[xxxi] ILC DARS (n 4) art 36.