Go Between 2001: no. 87
July-August
UN UPDATE
KOFI ANNAN WINS SECOND TERM
Acting on the recommendations of the Security Council, on 29 June the General Assembly decided by acclamation to reappoint Secretary-General Kofi Annan for a second five-year term. The decision was taken an unprecedented six months before the expiry of Mr. Annan’s first term on 31 December 2001.
Mr. Annan’s priorities as Secretary-General have been to revitalize the United Nations through a comprehensive programme of reform; to strengthen the Organization’s traditional work in the areas of development and the maintenance of international peace and security; to encourage and advocate human rights, the rule of law and the universal values of equality, tolerance and human dignity found in the United Nations Charter; and to restore public confidence in the Organization by reaching out to new partners and, in his words, by “bringing the United Nations closer to the people.”
Mr. Annan joined the United Nations system in 1962 as an administrative and budget officer with the World Health Organization in Geneva. Since then he has served with the UN Economic Commission for Africa in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia); the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF II) in Ismailia (Egypt); the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Geneva; and as Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources Management and Security Coordinator for the UN System (1987-1990) and Assistant Secretary-General for Programme Planning, Budget and Finance, and Controller (1990-1992) at UN headquarters in New York.
In 1990, following the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, Mr. Annan was asked by the Secretary-General, as a special assignment, to facilitate the repatriation of more than 900 international staff and citizens of Western countries from Iraq. He subsequently led the first United Nations team negotiating with Iraq on the sale of oil to fund purchases of humanitarian aid.
Before being appointed Secretary-General, Mr. Annan served as Assistant Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations (March 1993-February 1994) and then as Under-Secretary-General (February 1994-October 1995; April 1996-December 1996). His tenure as Under-Secretary-General coincided with unprecedented growth in the size and scope of United Nations peacekeeping operations, with a total deployment, at its peak in 1995, of almost 70,000 military and civilian personnel from 77 countries. From November 1995 to March 1996, following the Dayton Peace Agreement that ended the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr. Annan served as Special Representative of the Secretary-General to the former Yugoslavia, overseeing the transition in Bosnia and Herzegovina from the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) to the multinational Implementation Force (IFOR) led by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
In his acceptance speech to the General Assembly, Mr. Annan said “When your predecessors re-appointed Dag Hammarskjöld to a second term in 1957, he said that no one could accept the position of Secretary-General of the United Nations– ‘knowing what it means’–except from a sense of duty. He immediately added, however, that no one could serve in that capacity ‘without a sense of gratitude for a task as deeply rewarding as it is exacting; as perennially inspiring as, sometimes, it may seem discouraging.’
“After four and a half years in the job, I can only echo both halves of his statement. I labour under a constant sense of obligation–to you, the Members of the Organization; to all the world’s peoples, whom you represent; and in particular to my fellow Africans, whom you have honoured in my person today. But at the same time I am sustained by a profound feeling of gratitude for the confidence you have placed in me, and for the encouragement and support I have received from so many quarters. I am well aware that, on my own, I could never have won that confidence, or earned that support.
“Wherever I have travelled in these past four years, and whatever issues I have tackled, I have been inspired by the sacrifices that the staff of the United Nations make, every day, on behalf of the peoples we serve. In peacekeeping operations, in refugee camps, and in countless other missions of mercy and of hope, their dedication to the service of mankind is constant and unswerving. Whatever I have achieved, I owe it to their commitment and support, both in the field and at Headquarters. It has been my privilege to serve as the Secretary-General at a time of sweeping change and great challenges. My aims, I hope, have been clear.
“I have sought to equip this indispensable institution so that it can adjust to change, rise to new challenges, and serve its Member States and their peoples more effectively, while remaining true to the principles of the Charter. I have sought to turn an unflinching eye on the failures of our recent past, in order to assess more clearly what it will take for us to succeed in the future. I have sought to speak out in defence of those who cannot speak for themselves–for the right of the poorest to development, and the right of the weakest and most vulnerable to protection. And I have sought to make universal human rights the touchstone of my work, in all their aspects, because I believe they belong to every faith, every culture, and every people.”
Mr. Annan is the seventh Secretary-General of the United Nations, and the first to be appointed from the ranks of UN staff. He became Secretary-General on 1 January 1997, replacing Boutros Boutros-Ghali of Egypt. Mr. Annan, a Ghanaian, is 63. His new term runs from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2006.
GA SPECIAL SESSION ON AIDS
The three-day Special Session of the General Assembly dedicated to HIV/AIDS (25-27 June) ended with the adoption of a Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS.
In his closing remarks, GA President Harri Holkeri (Finland) said:
“An historic special session of the General Assembly has come to an end.
“Three days ago, we gathered here in New York to unite in a massive global commitment to combat the HIV/AIDS epidemic, responding to a global crisis of unprecedented scale. Despite the overwhelming statistics I highlighted on Monday, and the human suffering they represent, there is hope. Speakers in the plenary and in the round tables emphasized that we have clearly reached a turning point–either we will reach out to those who need this hope most, or we will be held responsible for not acting when we had the chance.
“This special session is also historic in the sense that it takes place only six months after the General Assembly decided to convene the session to mount an urgent response to this global crisis. An enormous amount of work has been put in by all of us to make this happen.
“During these three days Member States, intergovernmental organizations, United Nations agencies, civil society and private sector partners came together in round-table discussions, panels, workshops and countless meetings in corridors and cafes to share experiences, make new contacts and explore potential collaboration in mounting an expanded response to the epidemic. This special session gave ample evidence of how the United Nations can benefit from working with partners in civil society and the private sector.
“The Declaration of Commitment just adopted by Member States is the first global ‘battle plan’ against AIDS. It contains concrete targets for all of us to implement. It also contains mechanisms to follow up how those targets are to be reached. The beauty and significance of this Declaration of Commitment is in its pragmatic and straight-forward approach.
“By adopting the Declaration, the world has made a commitment to scale up efforts with specific targets and timeframes in all critical areas including prevention, care, treatment and support. The Declaration is a call for leadership and commitment at all levels in all countries; it is a framework for broad partnerships, and a tool for specific strategies, involving communities, young people and people living with HIV/AIDS, to turn the tide of the epidemic.
“The Declaration is also a global call for the resources that we so urgently need. In this regard, the establishment of a global fund has been welcomed, and a number of countries have announced pledges both to the fund and to the fight against AIDS.”
During the Special Session the GA held an unusual and heated debate on civil society participation triggered by the attempt of a number of countries belonging to the Organization of the Islamic Conference to block the participation of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) in the roundtable on HIV/AIDS and human rights. Canada, supported by other co-sponsors, including Argentina, Chile, Norway, and Sweden on behalf of the European Union, presented a written amendment that, following a vote, reinstated the IGLHRC in the list of civil society participants.
At a press conference following the event, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said, “I am perhaps even more impressed by the strong participation of non-governmental activists–within national delegations, at a wide range of parallel events, in the round tables, and as observers in the plenary sessions. You can feel their presence and you feel the presence of these activists everywhere, and they really have transformed the atmosphere of the building–as they do at all the best United Nations events. I am more than ever convinced that such partnerships are essential to our success in the new century. Of course they bring problems and controversy with them, but so does every new idea....I have been very clear right from the beginning that we need to open up this Organization, we need to bring the United Nations closer to the people, and we need to work in partnership with civil society, with the private sector, with foundations. I think I have demonstrated that I am determined to do that. I think that the Member States are beginning to open up; the Member States are accepting it, and they are working very closely with non-governmental organizations. I think you can take it that we are moving in the right direction, and that that is the order of things to come.”
For more information on the Special Session, see NGLS Roundup 76.
SMALL ARMS CONFERENCE CONCLUDES
Meeting from 9-20 July 2001, the UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects concluded its work with the adoption of a Programme of Action, which contains measures to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade in small arms at the national, regional and global levels. Conference President, Camilo Reyes Rodriguez (Colombia) stated at the closing session that the international community had taken a significant step forward in addressing one of the most urgent problems facing world peace and security.
Unfortunately, he said, there had been no agreement reached on two of the most important issues–to establish and maintain control over private ownership of small arms and the transfer of such weapons to non-State actors–even though there was overwhelming support for their inclusion in the outcome document. While congratulating all delegations for reaching consensus, he expressed disappointment that deliberations on those issues had been hampered by inflexibility on the part of one delegation.
He went on to say that African delegations, representing the States most affected by the scourge of the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, had agreed only reluctantly to the compromise language on those two points. They had done so in the true spirit of reaching a consensus that would permit the global community as a whole to move forward.
Several speakers in their concluding remarks expressed concern that the view of the overwhelming majority, on issues related to the control of arms used by citizens and the transfer of such weapons to non-state actors, had been held hostage by the position of one delegation.
The representative of the United States said that his delegation had noted during informals that it would have been preferable to take the text back to Washington for final review but under the circumstances, he understood why that could not have been done. Still, he was under instruction to consider the text “ad referendum” until such a review by his Government could be undertaken. His delegation would consider it as such.
For more information on the Conference, see NGLS Roundup 80.
BONN AGREEMENTS ON CLIMATE CHANGE
The Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, meeting in Bonn (Germany) in July 2001, adopted the Bonn agreements on the implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action. The package of decisions giving effect to the Bonn agreements will be completed and adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh (Morocco) on 29 October-9 November 2001. The completion of work on the Bonn agreements will advance implementation of the Convention and prepare the ground for the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol.
The future of the Protocol had been put in doubt following its rejection in March by the incoming Bush administration in the US on the grounds that it placed too onerous a burden on the US economy and did not include developing countries in the mandated cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.
“Today's agreement will keep up the pressure for early emissions reductions by governments and the private sector in the developed world,” said Michael Zammit Cutajar, Executive Secretary of the Convention. “It should also strengthen financial and technological support to developing countries to enable them to take action on climate change. The next step is for developed country governments to ratify the Protocol so that it can enter into force as quickly as possible–preferably by 2002.”
As part of the agreements, a special climate change fund and a fund for least developed countries will be established under the Convention to help developing countries adapt to climate change impacts, obtain clean technologies, and limit the growth in their emissions. In addition, an adaptation fund under the Kyoto Protocol will be established to finance concrete adaptation projects and programmes in developing countries.
One of the most difficult issues to resolve was how much credit developed countries could receive towards their Kyoto targets through “sinks” (which include any process, activity or mechanism that remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere). The meeting agreed that the eligible activities will include revegetation and the management of forests, croplands and grazing lands. Preliminary country quotas were set.
The agreements also contain processes governing the clean development mechanism (CDM) through which developed countries can invest in climate-friendly projects in developing countries and receive credit for the emissions avoided by these projects. The rules specify that energy efficiency, renewable energy, and forest sink projects can qualify for the CDM, while developed countries are to refrain from using nuclear facilities in the CDM. An executive board will be set up to oversee the CDM.
Other elements address international emissions trading, which enables developed countries to buy and sell emissions credits among themselves, and joint implementation, through which developed countries may gain credit for emission reductions resulting from projects in other developed countries.
The Bonn agreements emphasize that the three above mechanisms should be supplemental to domestic action and that domestic action has to constitute a significant element of the efforts made by each Party.
The Bonn agreements also include procedures and mechanisms for a compliance mechanism, which will be overseen by a compliance committee with a facilitative and an enforcement branch. One mechanism is that for every tonne of greenhouse gas that a country emits over its target emissions, that country will be required to reduce an additional 1.3 tonnes during the Protocol's second commitment period, which starts in 2013. Additional compliance procedures and mechanisms will be developed after the Protocol enters into force.
A statement issued by the Spokesman for the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, said: “The Secretary-General welcomes the Bonn agreements reached after a marathon negotiating session, as they give a strong signal to the global economy that early in this century, emission limitation must become part and parcel of production and consumption processes. The agreements also recognize the need for more financial and technological support for developing countries to engage in a global strategy against climate change and provide a solid political basis for industrialized countries to ratify the Kyoto Protocol and bring it into force in time for the Johannesburg Summit in September 2002.”
The resumed session of COP-6 was attended by some 4,500 participants from 181 countries, including 88 ministers.
The sixth session of the Conference of the Parties (COP-6) to the Climate Change Convention was suspended last November in The Hague due to an impasse in the negotiations. It resumed in Bonn on 16 July, with the four-day high-level segment beginning on 19 July.
The Protocol will enter into force and become legally binding after it has been ratified by at least 55 Parties to the Convention, including industrialized countries representing at least 55% of the total 1990 carbon dioxide emissions from this group.
Contact: Barbara Black, Meetings Services Officer, Conference and Information Support, Secretariat, UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, PO Box 260 124, Haus Carstanjen, Martin-Luther-King-Strasse 8, D-53175 Bonn, Germany, telephone +49-228/815 1523, fax +49-228/815 1999, e-mail <secretariat@unfccc.de>, website (www.unfccc.de).
33 COUNTRIES FACING FOOD EMERGENCIES
Some 60 million people in 33 countries are facing “exceptional food emergencies” due mainly to civil strife and drought, according to Foodcrops and Shortages, an annual report published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Of these, 16 countries are in Africa, 11 in Asia, four in Latin America, and two in Eastern Europe.
The report says that sub-Saharan Africa was worst off with 16 countries suffering from food emergencies caused mainly by natural disasters and civil strife. Despite improved weather conditions, the effects of drought are still being felt in some countries in Eastern Africa, where emergency food assistance is being provided to some 18 million people. The number of refugees and internally displaced people (IDPs) fleeing civil strife continues to increase, particularly in Central and Western Africa. Flooding in parts of Southern Africa, particularly in Mozambique, has resulted in several deaths and damage to property, infrastructure and crops.
Harsh winters have been one of the causes of food shortages in Asia, especially in Afghanistan, Mongolia and North Korea. In Afghanistan, civil strife has exacerbated the crisis. Armenia, Georgia and Tajikistan all face food supply problems because of the drought in 2000.
In Central America, earthquakes have damaged infrastructure, which has affected food production, especially in El Salvador. The prospects for South America, however, are good.
The United States also suffered from a very harsh winter, which has reduced yields. Official estimates indicate that the winter wheat area has declined by 5% since 2000, the lowest level since 1971. This was due to dry conditions during sowing times in the main growing areas.
Australia also suffered from dry conditions, resulting in a reduced wheat output: four million tons below last year’s bumper crop.
Unfavourable autumn weather in Western Europe means that the winter grain area planted is likely to decline from 2000. High temperatures in Central and Eastern Europe will have an adverse effect on the 2001 cereal harvest. In the Russian Federation, IDPs in Chechnya and neighbouring republics still need food assistance.
Contact: Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and Agriculture, Commodities and Trade Division, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, I-00100 Rome, Italy, fax +39-6/5705 4495, e-mail <giews1@fao.org>, website (www.fao.org/giews).
SECURITY COUNCIL HOLDS PUBLIC WRAP-UP MEETING
At the initiative of its current President, Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury (Bangladesh), the UN Security Council held its first-ever public wrap-up discussion of its monthly work on 29 June 2001 at UN headquarters in New York.
Describing June as a “very busy and difficult month,” Ambassador Chowdhury reviewed the public meetings of the Council that had taken place during the month. These included meetings on the situation between Iraq and Kuwait; cooperation between the Secretariat, the Council and troop-contributing countries; Bosnia and Herzegovina; and Kosovo.
Mr. Chowdhury said that a recurring concern in all the debates had been “how decisions are translated into action.” In this regard, he recommended that the UN Secretary-General be given resources to implement the Council’s decisions and that systematic follow-up to these decisions be taken. He said that the proactive initiatives taken in sending missions to conflict areas was a positive advance, and noted that the Council had “generated major decisions through the dispatch of such missions.” Mr. Chowdhury also emphasized the importance of the Council’s debate on the first-ever report of the Secretary-General on the prevention of armed conflict (A/55/985-S/2001/574, see page 34).
Council members made suggestions about transmitting Council decisions and resolutions to the governments, groups and individuals for which they were intended. They also underlined the importance of sending Council missions to conflict areas and agreed on the importance of preparation.
A resolution regarding troop-contributing countries (RES/1353, 2001) was also highlighted as a key step toward enhancing cooperation for peacekeeping within the UN system, although Council members agreed that more needs to be done.
PEACEKEEPING COMMITTEE ON BRAHIMI FOLLOW-UP
The 2001 session of the UN Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations was held from 18 June-6 July at UN headquarters in New York. Before beginning its comprehensive review of peacekeeping operations, the committee held a two-day debate based on the Secretary-General’s follow-up report (A/55/977) on the implementation the recommendations of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations and the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations (known as the Brahimi Panel). The recommendations focused not only on politics and strategy, but emphasized how operational and organizational aspects of the UN system could be improved (see Go Between 82).
Presenting the Secretary-General’s report, Committee Chair Arthur Mbanefo (Nigeria) said that the spirit of its recommendations could be summed up in four words, “We can do better.” He emphasized the need to significantly enhance the rapid and effective deployment of forces, to provide missions with properly qualified personnel in sufficient numbers, and to ensure safety and security of personnel in the field in all aspects of work.
The report is the first comprehensive managerial examination of how the UN has implemented peacekeeping. It is a distillation of recommendations and suggestions from individuals who have dealt with the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) through various aspects of conflict prevention and peace-building.
The report assesses the implications for the UN in aiming to deploy peacekeeping operations within 30-90 days of a Security Council resolution establishing them, as suggested by the Brahimi Panel and endorsed by the General Assembly. It outlines three options available to achieve this. The first is a “heavy strategic reserve” of equipment at the UN Logistics Base in Brindisi (Italy), which would entail an initial investment as high as US$350 million. The second suggestion is a “light strategic reserve” option, which would entail substantially lower up-front investments–perhaps some US$30 million–but would rely on extensive “retainer” contracts for the “just-in-time” delivery of goods and services (with very large annual recurring costs, over US$100 million per annum). The third is a “medium strategic reserve” option, which seeks to keep the initial investment, costs and annual recurring costs at lower levels–some US$170 million up-front investment and some US$40 million annual recurring costs. The report recommends the “medium strategic reserve” option as the most economical and practical.
According to the Secretary-General, any of the options to meet the 30-90 day deployment timeframe will require:
-- a one-time expenditure budget to enhance the strategic deployment stocks at the logistics base, as well as to cater for annual recurring costs;
-- entry into prearranged contracts and letters of assist for key services;
-- increased reliability of standby arrangements with Member States, especially for support units; and
-- improved “personnel surge capacity,” particularly for staff in areas of administrative support.
The report also says that the ability of the UN to meet the stated deployment objectives would be improved by a pre-commitment authority to initiate spending on essential goods and services before the adoption of a resolution establishing an operation. Such proposals, the report states, would help the UN to ensure that an effective civilians and civilian police monitoring structure could be established together with a rapidly deployed military contingent.
The report also presents the outline of a strategy for civilian staffing of peacekeeping operations to address critical shortcomings in the current system. That strategy hinges on five critical elements: enhanced advance planning; expanded sources of recruitment; streamlined recruitment procedures; enhanced rapid deployment capabilities; and improved systems for career development and training.
Among major issues raised during the ensuing debate were:
--the importance of effective consultation with troop-contributing countries;
--information gathering and analysis;
--proposals for enhancing the UN rapid response capability;
--the need to include a gender component in peacekeeping operations; and
--the importance of ensuring the safety and security of UN and associated personnel.
SUMMIT ON THE SECURITY OF INTERNATIONAL STAFF
Since January 1992, hundreds of peacekeepers and some 200 civilian personnel working for the UN have lost their lives. The increase in attacks against UN staff members and humanitarian workers worldwide was discussed at the fourth annual Summit on the Security of International Staff, whose theme was “Getting Away with Murder.” The Summit, held on 28 June 2001 at UN headquarters in New York, was organized by the Standing Committee on the Security and Independence of the International Civil Service and the UN Staff Council. The plenary session drew attention to the increased attacks and discussed possible solutions.
In his keynote address, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called on governments to “remember our partners in civil society, with whom we work side by side, and our friends in the media, whose efforts to inform the world about human suffering often place them in dangerous circumstances.” Mr. Annan noted that while a degree of risk has always been part of the job, the conflicts of the 1990s were characterized by a dangerous loosening of restraints imposed by international law on the conduct of hostilities. The protagonists of these conflicts, Mr. Annan said, “have demonstrated a profound lack of respect for the role of outside entities who are providing assistance to the victims.”
The Secretary-General emphasized that security depends on host governments fulfilling their obligations. “Parties to conflict must allow aid workers safe and unfettered access to people in need, whoever and wherever they may be. And all parties should respect the principles of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, in particular the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, and the civilian and humanitarian character of refugee camps and settlements,” he said.
Pointing out that less than one-third of the 189 UN Member States are parties to the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, Mr. Annan stressed that “security starts with legal protection.” He urged governments to ratify the Convention without further delay and to approve a Protocol that would extend the scope of the Convention’s application to all UN operations and categories of personnel beyond those currently covered. The Secretary-General also emphasized that the International Criminal Court (ICC) could provide another layer of protection, as it defines attacks on peacekeeping and humanitarian personnel as war crimes.
The session was followed by a panel discussion that focused on the legal rights of United Nations and humanitarian workers. Panelists included Ralph Zacklin of the UN Office of Legal Affairs, and the NGO Coalition for the International Criminal Court (ICC).
OPTIONAL PROTOCOL ON CHILD SOLDIERS
In June 2001 the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) became the sixth state to ratify the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict. Ten ratifications are required for the Optional Protocol to come into force. Seventy-nine countries have so far signed the Optional Protocol.
According to UN estimates, between 8,000 and 12,000 children are serving in army and rebel groups throughout the DRC as guards to senior officers, cooks, porters and spies. Though both the government and the rebel groups signed the Optional Protocol, neither has given a timeline for the demobilization of the child soldiers. The DRC’s ratification coincided with an Amnesty International report that says that there is an increase in the number of children being recruited into the DRC armed forces. According to the report, “many of the children who have been recruited have also been victims of deliberate and arbitrary killings, beatings and other forms of torture or ill-treatment.”
The Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict prohibits governments and armed groups from using children under the age of 18 in hostilities; bans all compulsory recruitment under 18; and raises the minimum age for voluntary recruitment by governments from the current standard of 15 to 18 years.
In Sierra Leone the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels in May 2001 released a total of 591 child soldiers and children affiliated with warring factions. A large proportion of the freed children were child soldiers, while the remainder had been abducted or displaced from their families during the conflict. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) welcomed the children’s release and said it indicated a “significant demonstration of commitment to the peace process,” and urged all parties to the conflict to stop using child soldiers. “Our only regret is that the release of girls has been minimal,” said JoAnna Van Gerpen, UNICEF’s representative in Sierra Leone. Girls recruited into the armed forces are particularly vulnerable; they are often forced to work as sex slaves of soldiers and officers.
Contact: Rory Mungoven, Coordinator, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, PO Box 22696, London N4 3ZJ, United Kingdom, telephone +44-20/7274 0230, fax +44-20/7738 4110, e-mail <info@childsoldiers.org>, website (www.child-soldiers.org).
FAO COMMISSION ON GENETIC RESOURCES
An agreement to protect the world’s plant genetic resources for food and agriculture was reached early in July at the end of a week-long extraordinary session of the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture in Rome. The Commission comprises 160 countries and the European Union. The accord was reached after a week of intense debate, which culminated a seven-year process of negotiations.
The legally-binding International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources aims to protect the world’s most important food and forage crops in an effort to safeguard global food security. The Undertaking seeks to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from their use. The treaty will be submitted for adoption by FAO Member States at the biennial FAO Conference meeting in November. It will enter into force after ratification by 40 countries.
The presence of diverse varieties in a field can help prevent devastation by pests or disease. But over the past century, the traditional heterogeneous varieties that contain most of the world’s agricultural biodiversity have been displaced from farmers’ fields by modern homogeneous varieties. Most of these traditional varieties have been lost and many of those that remain can now be found only in gene banks, including those of the International Agricultural Research Centres. Away from farmers’ fields, these varieties are unable to evolve and adapt to changing environmental conditions.
“With modernization, fewer and fewer crops form the basis of the world’s food security,” said José Esquinas-Alcázar, secretary of the Commission. “A study carried out by FAO shows that, over the years, about 7,000 plant species have been cultivated or collected by humans for food. At present, however, only 30 crops provide 90% of the world’s calorie intake. This agreement will help protect global agricultural biodiversity.”
The agreement establishes a system that facilitates broad access to a list of crops crucial to food security. This includes both materials in gene banks, farmers’ fields and in the wild. The agreement also provides for the exchange of information and technology between countries, particularly to benefit developing countries and countries in transition.
It also ensures sharing of the financial benefits resulting from the use of the plant genetic resources covered by the system. Mandatory payments will be required when commercial benefits are obtained from the use of these resources. Payments will be voluntary, however, when a commercial product derived from these resources is still available for research and plant breeding. These payments will be used for priority activities, particularly in developing countries and countries in transition.
The Undertaking highlights the contributions of farmers around the world to conserving and improving plant genetic resources and making them available. While acknowledging that the responsibility for realizing farmers’ rights rests with national governments, the treaty asks governments to “take measures to protect and promote Farmers’ Rights.” Such measures include protecting traditional knowledge relevant to plant genetic resources, promoting farmers’ rights to share equitably in the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources and to participate in national-level decision making on matters related to their conservation and sustainable use.
A few key issues related to the Undertaking are yet to be resolved, and countries will continue to seek consensus on these issues over the coming months and during the FAO Conference in November. One of these issues is the relationship of the International Undertaking to other environmental, and WTO trade-related, international agreements. Another is the precise wording regarding intellectual property rights on plant genetic materials. Finally, talks will continue on the possible expansion of the list of crops to be covered by the system.
NGOs have criticized the text on the grounds that without changes it will allow rich seed and biotechnology corporations to acquire crop genes for a minimal payment and then privatize them. “This amounts to giving industry a free ride and exempting it from obligations,” said Henk Hobbelink of GRAIN. “The rich countries have asserted their corporations’ ‘right’ to ‘privatize genes’ over the rights to food and environmental security of poor people in developing countries. It is patents and profits before people and the environment.”
Patrick Mulvany of the UK’s Intermediate Technology Department Group (ITDG) said, “We are relieved that the IU has survived this make-or-break meeting. But the battle now goes to a higher level. The IU in this form falls far short of the fair, equitable and comprehensive agreement that 400 civil society organizations from 60 countries demanded. First, it is not fair–although the Farmers’ Rights are recognized they will be subordinate to national laws protecting the plant breeding industry. Second, it is not equitable–mandatory benefits returned to farmers in developing countries through this treaty will be a minuscule fraction of the food industry’s US$2 trillion annual turnover. And third, it is not comprehensive–it will apply to a mere 34 food crops and a derisory 29 forages.”
Christoph Then of Greenpeace said: “There should be no patents on life and especially on the genes and seeds that feed us. The IU was, and still is, an opportunity for the first time to exempt a category of genes from private ownership, and to put agricultural biodiversity before trade. We must keep up the pressure.”
Contact: John Riddle, Information Officer, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, I-00100 Rome, Italy, telephone +39-06/5705 3259, fax +39-06/5705 3699, e-mail <john.riddle@fao.org>, website (www.fao.org).
ITDG, The Schumacher Centre for Technology and Development, Bourton Hall, Bourton-on-Dunsmore, Rugby CV23 9QZ, UK, telephone +44-1788/661210, e-mail <news@itdg.org.uk>, website (www.itdg.org). Also see UK Agricultural Biodiversity Coalition website (www.ukabc.org).
FAO/WHO CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION
Meeting in Geneva from 2-7 July 2001, the Codex Alimentarius Commission has agreed on the first global principles for the safety assessment of genetically modified foods, on maximum permitted levels of certain food toxins, and on guidelines for organic livestock production.
The Codex Commission agreed in principle that the safety of food derived from genetically modified organisms (GMO) should be tested and approved by governments prior to entering the market. In particular, GMO foods should be tested for their potential to cause allergic reactions.
“This is the first global step toward the safety assessment of genetically modified foods,” said Gro Harlem Brundtland, Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO).
“International agreement on how to perform risk assessment of genetically modified foods will help all countries, especially developing countries,” added Dr. Brundtland. The Commission is a subsidiary of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and WHO with 165 Member States.
The Commission also approved a series of new maximum levels of environmental contaminants, particularly lead, cadmium, and aflatoxin, found in food, such as fruit juices, cereals, and milk.
“The work of the Codex Commission on toxic substances is particularly important given the long-term health risks for consumers, especially children,” said Alan Randell, Secretary of the Codex Commission.
“For example, lead is detrimental to the intellectual development of young children and the new standards adopted by the Commission definitely improve the current situation. Nevertheless there is more work to do and the Commission will continue to work on the issue,” Randell said.
The Codex Commission also set maximum levels of aflatoxin in milk and milk products. Aflatoxin is a carcinogenic substance that can be transmitted from animal feed (for examples, peanuts and corn) into milk. The new maximum limit for aflatoxin in milk is 0.5 micrograms per kilogram.
Some countries argued for a stricter aflatoxin limit of 0.05 micrograms per kilogram. However the majority of countries agreed that the higher limit was more feasible, particularly in developing countries. The Commission agreed to review the standard once there is new scientific evidence on alflatoxin health risks.
“Given the amount of dairy products that are consumed world wide–especially by children–it was crucial to set a global standard for aflatoxin,” said Tom Billy, Chairman of the Codex Commission.
The Codex meeting also agreed to new guidelines for organic livestock production. According to these guidelines, organic livestock farming should aim to use natural breeding methods; minimize stress in animals; prevent disease; and progressively eliminate the use of certain chemical veterinary drugs, including antibiotics. Animals should mainly be fed with high quality organic feed, not meat and bone meal, although fish and milk products are acceptable. The use of growth hormones is not permitted.
The Commission adopted a strategic framework that places greater emphasis on food safety issues in developing countries. Members welcomed efforts to enable developing countries to build their own food quality and safety systems. FAO has initiated a Global Facility on Food Safety and Quality for the Least Developed Countries to strengthen their national food regulatory systems and their competitiveness in international food trade.
Meanwhile, the WHO has proposed the creation of a trust fund to increase the participation of developing countries in Codex. While Codex standards, guidelines and recommendations are voluntary, they are recognized by the World Trade Organization as reference points in international trade disputes.
Contact: Erwin Northoff, Media Officer, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, I-00100 Rome, Italy, telephone +39-06/5705 3105, fax +39-06/5705 4975, e-mail <erwin.northoff@fao.org>, website (www.fao.org).
Gregory Hartl, Spokesperson, WHO, 20 avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/791 4458, fax +41-22/791 4858, e-mail <hartlg@who.int>, website (www.who.int).
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND GENETIC RESOURCES
The Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (ICG) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) concluded its first meeting, held in Geneva from 1-4 May 2001, by encouraging discussions on intellectual property aspects of these assets. WIPO Assistant Director General Francis Gurry said this signified a “new outreach of the intellectual property system to look at the possible use of intellectual property in different ways.” He said that the real significance of the meeting is that the economic as well as the cultural contribution of traditional knowledge are being recognized.
The Committee agreed that certain conceptual problems exist with the application of the current intellectual property system to traditional knowledge and folklore, because intellectual property has a date of creation, a limited duration of protection and an identifiable author. Traditional knowledge does not have these limitations, and is being replenished constantly.
Member States said they supported work on how intellectual property can be used to protect traditional knowledge. The first step would be to first identify elements that can be protected. They asked the secretariat to compile information on the extent to which traditional intellectual property system is sufficient in addressing this issue.
WIPO will submit model intellectual property contractual clauses for access to genetic resources and benefit sharing to the next meeting of the Committee, to take place in the last quarter of 2001. This will provide an opportunity to develop best practices that can use the intellectual property system as a means of benefit sharing.
Member States asked WIPO to address this issue in conjunction with the secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization's (FAO) Commission on Genetic Resources.
Contact: Francis Gurry, Assistant Director General and Legal Counsel, Office of Legal Counsel and Organization Affairs, WIPO, PO Box 18, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/338 9428 or 338 9547, fax +41-22/740 3700, e-mail <francis.gurry@wipo.int>, website (www.wipo.org).
INITIATIVE FOR LDC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) launched an initiative in June to assist least developed countries (LDCs) to meet their obligations under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs).
At the launch ceremony, Dr. Kamil Idris, Director General of WIPO, emphasized that intellectual property was a tool for technological advancement, economic growth and wealth creation for all nations, especially for least developed countries.
WTO Director-General Mike Moore said that the implementation of these obligations posed a considerable challenge, but they also presented an opportunity for the world’s poorest nations to harness intellectual property in order to accelerate their economic, social, and cultural development. He also said that the joint initiative, which offers varied forms of technical assistance, will help least developed countries promote their developmental objectives.
Least developed countries have until 1 January 2006 to bring their laws on copyright, patents, trademarks and other areas of intellectual property into line with the TRIPs Agreement. They also have to provide ways of enforcing the laws effectively, in order to deal with piracy, counterfeiting and other forms of intellectual property infringement.
The technical assistance available under the joint initiative includes cooperation in preparing legislation, training, institution building, modernizing intellectual property systems and enforcement. Of the 49 countries defined by the UN as least developed, 30 are members of the WTO (another six are negotiating WTO membership) and 41 are members of WIPO. All least developed countries can participate in the technical assistance offered; they do not need to be WIPO or WTO members.
The TRIPs Agreement entered into force on 1 January 1995, at the same time the WTO came into being. It was one of the outcomes of the Uruguay Round. The agreement specifies minimum standards of protection for each of the main categories of intellectual property, building on the main WIPO conventions. The agreement also deals with the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Under the TRIPs Agreement, developed countries had to comply with its provisions by 1 January 1996; developing countries were given an extra four years, until 1 January 2000; least developed countries have the possibility of an extension after the 1 January 2006 deadline.
Contact: Media Relations and Public Affairs Section, WIPO, PO Box 18, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/338 8161 or 338 9547, fax +41-22/338 8810, e-mail <publicinf@wipo.int>, website (www.wipo.int).
Bernard Kuiten, External Relations Officer, WTO, Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, Case postale, CH-1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland, telephone +41-22 /739 5676, fax +41-22/ 739 5777, website (www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/trips_e.htm).
GLOBAL ILLICIT DRUG TRENDS 2001
There has been a sharp reduction in the global production of opium as the result of a ban on opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan for the 2000-2001 growing season, according to Global Illicit Drug Trends 2001, a report published annually by the United Nations Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention (ODCCP). Afghanistan accounted for 70% of the world’s opium production in 2000.
The report provides a comprehensive overview of the issue of clandestine synthetic drugs, including likely future developments. The report says that synthetic drugs have become an issue of global concern over the past decade, and have been spreading rapidly as part of mass youth culture. This spread is also due to the wide availability of their base materials, the simplicity of their manufacturing process, the flexibility of their evolving chemical composition and the difficulty of controlling their perpetually-changing base materials and end-products. The report says that the ten-year trend for seizures shows production of amphetamine-type stimulants have grown at an average rate of 30% per year.
According to the report, global cocaine consumption remained stable in North America, but increased in Europe and a number of countries in South America. Heroin consumption remained stable in Europe but increased in some Eastern European and Asian countries. Cannabis use, on the other hand, is increasing in Europe, the Americas, Africa and Oceania but decreasing in South and Southwest Asia.
Contact: Sandeep Chawla, Chief, Research Section, Division for Operations and Analysis, ODCCP, Vienna International Centre, PO Box 500, A-1400 Vienna, Austria, telephone +43-1/26060 4196, e-mail <sandeep.chawla@undpc.org>, website (www.undcp.org).
WORLD COMMODITY SURVEY
Globalization and liberalization have profoundly changed traditional methods of commodity production, marketing and financing, according to the World Commodity Survey 2000-2001, published by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
The survey says that this can be seen at the international level, with the end of economic clauses in international commodity agreements, and also at the national level, with the disappearance of national commodity marketing boards and stabilization bodies. At the micro-economic level, marketing chains have become “disorganized and populated by a large number of players without established track records,” says the report.
The survey provides commodity profiles and statistics on issues including electronic commodity exchanges, genetically modified organisms, temperate zone agriculture, tropical products, fish and shellfish, metals and energy.
According to the report developing countries, especially least developed countries (LDCs), are suffering due to a combination of recent developments, including the dismantling of 30-year-old export earnings compensatory mechanisms such as the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Compensatory and Contingency Financing Facility, and the European Union’s mechanisms for agricultural commodities and mineral products, STABEX and SYSMIN.
The report says that tropical agricultural products such as coffee and cocoa experienced historically low prices, metal and ore prices increased in 2000, and petroleum rose from under US$10.00 a barrel in 1998 to US$30.00 in 2000.
UNCTAD will develop an international electronic portal (www.unctad.org/infocomm), where 40 commodity profiles and value-added information on market structures and innovations will be made available by mid-2002. UNCTAD will also develop a CD-Rom on marketing structures of cocoa-producing countries in 2002.
Contact: Olivier Matringe, Economist, UNCTAD, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/917 5774, fax +41-22/917 0509, e-mail <olivier.matringe@unctad.org>, website (www.unctad.org).
COMMITTEE ON THE PEACEFUL USES OF OUTER SPACE
The 44th session of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, held in Vienna from 6-15 June 2001, stressed the importance of:
-- the development of comprehensive, worldwide environmental monitoring;
-- using space to better manage natural resources;
-- building an integrated, global system to help mitigate and deal with natural disasters; and
-- providing universal access to global positioning and navigation systems.
These priorities reflect the recommendations of the 1999 Third United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNISPACE III). The Committee discussed a mechanism to implement the recommendations through cooperation between individual Member States and NGOs.
The Committee also addressed the problem of space debris–retired or defunct satellites and fragments and small particles of different origins–which could collide with spacecraft and cause damage. The Committee said that international cooperation was needed to minimize the potential impact of space debris on future space missions.
The Committee endorsed the agreement of the Legal Subcommittee on establishing an ad hoc consultative mechanism to review the issues relating to Protocol on Space Property to the Draft Convention of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (Unidroit) on international interests in mobile equipment.
The Committee agreed that a new item, Space and Society, would be included on the agenda of the Committee at its 45th and 46th session. This would enable Member States to share information on their efforts to demonstrate how space activities such as remote sensing and telecommunications could enrich their daily lives.
CARIBBEAN REGIONAL SEMINAR ON DECOLONIZATION
Decolonization is one of the success stories of the last half-century, said UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in a message to the Caribbean Regional Seminar on Decolonization, held in Havana (Cuba) from 23-25 May 2001. The seminar was organized by the Special Committee on the Situation with Regard to the Implementation of the Declaration of the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and People.
The regional seminar “provides us with a unique opportunity to recommit ourselves to the goal of assuring that all peoples can exercise their right of self-determination in accordance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions on decolonization,” said Mr. Annan. “Decolonization is clearly one of the great success stories of the last half-century, and we must see the process through to its end.”
Participants discussed the effects of maintaining military bases and holding military manoeuvres in Non-Self-Governing Territories such as Puerto Rico and Guam. They also emphasized the importance of dialogue between the Special Committee and Administering Powers, providing objective information to the peoples of the territories on their rights and the need for UN specialized agencies to provide assistance to Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Speaking at the meeting, Julian Robert Hunte, Chairman and Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade of Saint Lucia, said that the seminar was a “critical first step” in the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism (2001-2010), as it proceeded to devise international strategies in a concerted effort to ensure that the right to self-determination was realized in all of the remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories. “Nothing short of this goal should be acceptable,” he said.
Participants included Member States for the Special Committee of 24, other UN Member States including Administering Powers France and the United Kingdom, representatives of some of the Non-Self-Governing Territories, experts, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, observers and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The Non-Self-Governing Territories are American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, East Timor, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Guam, Montserrat, New Caledonia, Pitcairn, St. Helena, Tokelau, Turks and Caicos Islands, US Virgin Islands and Western Samoa.
MONTREAL PROTOCOL MEETING
Experts and diplomats from the 178 countries that are Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer met in Montreal (Canada) from 24-26 July 2001 to review options to tighten the international regime for protecting the stratospheric ozone layer.
Issues discussed at the 21st meeting of the Open-Ended Working Group of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol included:
-- an annual review of new substances with significant ozone-depleting potential that may enter the market;
-- reducing emissions from ozone-depleting chemicals used as processing agents;
-- reviewing applications for essential-use exemptions for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ozone-depleting substances for 2002 and beyond;
-- launching a study on monitoring and preventing illegal trade;
-- developing national management plans for reducing halons in critical use;
-- considering critical-use exemptions for methyl bromide to be implemented beginning 2005; and
-- tightening the Protocol’s phase-out schedule for developing country consumption of hydrochlofuorocarbons (HCFCs).
Participants also worked on preparing the terms of reference for a study on the replenishment of the Multilateral Fund for 2003-2005. The Fund helps developing countries fund the incremental costs of phasing out ozone-depleting substances.
An informal document containing a proposal on new substances with ozone-depleting potential was presented to the meeting. The proposal requested the secretariat to prepare and update a list of new chemicals that might damage the ozone layer, which would be included on the secretariat website (see below) and distributed to all Parties. It also called on Parties that had firms producing the listed chemicals to request the firms to analyze the ozone-depleting potential of the substances and submit available toxicological information to the secretariat. The document requested the Protocol’s Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) and the Scientific Assessment Panel to develop an environmental screening mechanism for use by the Parties, which could be used to recommend more detailed evaluations of listed chemicals when the panels considered it appropriate. The Working Group agreed that the proposal should serve as a starting point for discussions on the issue in the Technical Segment of the 13th Meeting of the Parties.
The European Community had raised the question of tightening the phase-out schedule for developing country consumption of HCFCs. However, some representatives said that HCFCs were the affordable and cost-effective option for many applications, and there were no commercially viable alternatives. The countries had invested in HCFC technology to replace CFCs, and did not have the resources to replace HCFC technologies. They said that premature moves to phase them out could retard economic growth in many Article 5 Parties (developing countries). They suggested that the European Community might wish to consider carrying out more demonstration projects of viable substitutes in developing countries.
Currently, the developing countries are committed to a freeze in their production and consumption of CFCs at average 1995-1997 levels. In 2002 they will also be required to freeze halons and methyl bromide. During the three-year period of 2003-2005, developing countries will be further required to reduce the consumption of all major ozone-depleting substances. While progress has been made in reducing emissions, the ozone layer continues to thin as a result of past emissions. In September 2000, satellite measurements reported that the ozone hole over the Antarctic had reached a record 28.3 million square kilometres–around 1 million square kilometres more than the previous record in 1998.
The results of this week’s meeting of the Open-ended Working Group will be forwarded for final approval by the 13th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, to be held in Colombo (Sri Lanka) from 15-19 October 2001.
Contact: Madhava Sharma, Executive Secretary, Ozone Secretariat, PO Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya, telephone +254-2/623885, fax +254-2/623913, e-mail <madhava.sarma@unep.org>, website (www.unep.ch/ozone/home.htm).
CLEANER ENERGY SCHEMES
Voluntary actions by industry, governments and organizations are leading to small but significant reductions in emissions of global warming gases worldwide, according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Energy Council (WEC).
Studies by WEC indicate that by 2005, the number of new clean government energy schemes, government initiatives and renewable energy projects will save the equivalent of one to two billion tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually. This is a saving of over 3-6% in terms of global greenhouse gas emissions in the year 2000. The findings show that despite political disagreements over the science and the need for legally-binding reduction targets, there has been some progress in reducing emissions.
China has reduced its emissions by 17% since 1996-1997–in spite of economic growth estimated at 36%–by promoting energy conservation, ending coal subsidies and supporting more efficient coal-fire power generation. A study from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California (USA) says that China’s CO2 emissions are already 400-900 million tonnes below what was expected in 2000.
The United States has the highest share of global CO2 emissions (23%), and the levels have grown from 4.8 billion tonnes in 1990 to over 5.4 billion tonnes in 1998, according to the International Energy Agency and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). But even there, the amount of CO2 emitted per unit of gross domestic product (GDP) declined by 11%.
“The fact that two of the most important countries at the centre of the global warming debate are acting, and are managing to break the link between growth and a parallel rise in emissions,” said Klaus Töpfer, UNEP Executive Director, “offers an important glimmer of hope which must be built on. We must do more, we have to do more. But the march to a less polluting world has begun and must be helped to continue even if there are disagreements between governments.”
UNEP estimates that over the next 20 years, some US$15 trillion is going to be invested in energy infrastructure.
Contact: Mark Radka, Energy Programme Coordinator, UNEP, telephone +33-1/44 37 14 27, e-mail <mark.radka@unep.fr>, website (www.unep.org).
Elena Virkkala Nikhaev, Manager of Programmes, World Energy Council, telephone +44-20/734 5966, e-mail <nekhaev@worldenergy>, website (www.worldenergy.org/ghg).
UNEP WORKSHOP ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) held a workshop to examine how global trade rules and international environmental treaties can be made fully compatible. The workshop on Compliance, Enforcement and Dispute Settlement in Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) was held in Geneva on 26 June and was attended by representatives of UNEP, World Trade Organization (WTO), MEA secretariats, and trade and environment ministries.
“Next year’s World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg offers a major opportunity for world leaders to promote a constructive relationship between our global systems of economic and environmental governance,” said Klaus Töpfer, UNEP Executive Director. “Efforts to strengthen cooperation between environmental agreements and the WTO are vital to building a world economy that can deliver sustainable development.”
The workshop aimed to help officials address potential conflicts between the legally-binding trade and environment regimes. One of the key issues discussed was the relationship between the compliance and dispute settlement systems of the two regimes. Environmental treaties tend to use measures such as financial and technical assistance to facilitate compliance, then seek to resolve disputes through conciliation and arbitration procedures. The WTO relies more on binding judicial procedures. Both regimes use trade restrictions to encourage compliance.
Participants also discussed building cooperation on implementation between MEAs, and between MEAs, WTO and UNEP.
The workshop resulted in a list of proposed steps, which include:
-- enhancing information exchange and joint capacity-building activities between the UN Environment Programme, World Trade Organization and the Multilateral Environmental Agreements;
-- explore ways to advance pending requests for observer status in the various WTO bodies;
-- explore cooperation in the context of potential disputes; and
-- continue informal cooperation on the interface between international environmental and trade governance between the organizations and agreements.
The workshop was timed to contribute to the debate at WTO’s Committee on Trade and Environment on 27-28 June.
Contact: Economic and Trade Unit, UNEP, International Environment House, 15 chemin des Anémones, CH-1219 Châtelaine (Geneva), Switzerland, telephone +41-22/917 8243, fax +41-22/796 9240, e-mail <etu@unep.ch>, website (www.unep.ch/etu).
INSTRUMENT FOR TRANSBOUNDARY DAMAGE
A legally-binding instrument on civil liability for transboundary damage caused by industrial accidents will be drawn up by Member States of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). This decision is the result of a meeting, held in Geneva from 2-3 July 2001, of the Parties to UNECE Conventions on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, and the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents.
The instrument will fill “one of the major gaps in international environmental legislation,” said Kaj Bärlund, UNECE Environmental Director. “It will also have the potential to prevent accidents from happening in the first place.”
The legally-binding instrument will be negotiated within the scope of both UNECE conventions. The first negotiations will take place in November. Environmental NGOs and other stakeholders, such as insurance companies, as well countries that have not signed the conventions will be encouraged to take part. The instrument should be ready for adoption at the next Ministerial Conference to take place in Kiev (Ukraine) in May 2003.
Contact: Kaj Bärlund, Director, Environment and Human Settlements Division, UNECE, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/917 2370, fax +41-22/907 0107, e-mail <kaj.barlund@unece.org>, website (www.unece.org/env/welcome.htm).
ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE SHIP-BREAKING GUIDELINES
International experts on hazardous wastes and shipping are working on international guidelines for the environmentally safe dismantling of obsolete ships.
The guidelines are being drafted under the auspices of the Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal and were discussed at the 18th meeting of the Technical Working Group of the Basel Convention in Geneva from 18-20 June 2001. The Technical Working Group comprises experts from Parties and other countries; intergovernmental organizations such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), International Labour Office (ILO) and environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace. The guidelines are to be submitted for adoption to the sixth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention in 2002.
The decommissioning of large vessels may involve the removal of tonnes of hazardous wastes, including persistent organic pollutants (POPs). Workers, local communities, coastal and ocean biodiversity, groundwater and air are all at risk. The guidelines seek to eliminate or minimize these risks by introducing universally applied principles for the environmentally safe dismantling of ships. The guidelines detail procedures and good practices for, among other things, sorting parts of the dismantled ships for reuse, recycling and disposal; identifying potential contaminants; preventing toxic releases; and responding to emergencies and accidents. They also address the design, construction and operation of ship-dismantling facilities.
Ship-breaking contributes significantly to local and national economies. Steel from the ships can be sold as scrap metal for reprocessing. Other material such as engines, electrical equipment, furniture, pumps and valves can also be recycled. Because of the labour-intensive nature of the work, a large number of ships are sent to Asia for dismantling. With increasing international trade, the global shipping fleet is expanding: estimates show that 500-700 merchant vessels will be scrapped annually over the next 15 years, particularly in Asia (Bangladesh, India and Pakistan).
NGOs present at the meeting expressed some concerns regarding the guidelines. Greenpeace said that without a strong linkage to mandatory ship redesign, the guidelines can serve as a disincentive to proceed with clean production of ships. Greenpeace also said the trade of hazardous waste to non-OECD countries could be unwittingly promoted by the attempt to achieve safe dismantling of ships containing hazardous substances. It was therefore important that the decontamination of ships takes place before scrapping them.
Another concern raised was that because some long-term recommendations–such as the removal of asbestos–could only be realized in ten years, ships sent for scrap before then would be dismantled in an unacceptable way. Greenpeace recommended that, among other things, there should be a strong emphasis on the clean production of ships; IMO should develop a mandatory regime for ship-breaking; and that IMO should insist on immediate and continuing decontamination of vessels still in operation. ICS has made available a Code of Conduct of Practice on Ship Recycling prepared by the industry in August, and ILO is working on a project to improve working conditions in ship-breaking.
Contact: Secretariat of the Basel Convention, International Environment House, 15 chemin des Anémones, CH-1219 Châtelaine (Geneva), Switzerland, telephone +41-22/979 1111, fax +41-22/797 3454, e-mail <sbc@unep.ch>, website (www.basel.int).
INTERNATIONAL SEABED AUTHORITY
The International Seabed Authority, meeting in Kingston (Jamaica) for its seventh session from 2-13 July 2001, considered for the first time two recently discovered sources of valuable minerals in the deep oceans. Unknown twenty years ago, the resources are hydrothermal polymetallic sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts, rich sources of minerals such as copper, iron, zinc, silver and gold, as well as cobalt. The sulphides are found around volcanic hot springs, especially in the western Pacific Ocean, while the crusts occur on oceanic ridges and elsewhere at several locations around the world. The Authority discussed this topic after having completed last July a set of regulations on exploring for polymetallic nodules, the first major mineral resource discovered on seabed areas beyond national jurisdiction.
The debate revolved around the issue of how quickly the Authority should move to draft regulations for the exploitation of these resources. Several countries, including some large industrialized States, argued that more time and study were needed, given the fact that little was known about the nature and occurrence of these resources and that their exploitation was nowhere in sight. Another group of States, including many developing countries, favoured a prompt start on the regulations, to protect the interests of humanity as a whole in deep seabed resources and to safeguard the marine environment; they also noted that prospecting for polymetallic sulphides had already begun in at least one area within national jurisdiction, in the Bismarck Sea off Papua New Guinea.
Steering between the position of countries that sought quick action to regulate exploration for these resources and those stressing the need for more information, the Council of the Authority decided to continue consideration next year of “conceptual issues” involved in elaborating regulations, while asking for further study by its secretariat and its Legal and Technical Commission.
The Council was also informed that six of the seven “pioneer investors” had signed contracts in 2001 with the Authority governing their exploration for polymetallic nodules in designated areas, with the seventh expected to sign shortly. During the session, the Council’s Legal and Technical Commission approved recommendations to guide contractors on the kinds of environmental data they should gather when checking on the environmental consequences of their exploration activities. The council deferred consideration of these recommendations until 2002.
The task of the Authority is to organize and control all mineral-related activities in the international seabed area beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, an area underlying most of the world’s oceans. This responsibility was assigned under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, as refined by the 1994 Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI (seabed provisions) of the Convention. The Convention defines this deep seabed area as “the common heritage of mankind.” The Authority, in existence since 1994, is an autonomous international agency having a relationship agreement with the United Nations. As usual, both of the Authority’s principal organs, the 135-member Assembly and the 36-member Council, met during the annual session.
Contact: International Seabed Authority, 14-20 Port Royal Street, Kingston, Jamaica, telephone +1-876/922 9105, fax +1-876/922 0195, website (www.isa.org.jm/en/default.htm).
DRAFT CONVENTION ON UNDERWATER HERITAGE
Experts appointed from almost 90 countries have reached agreement on a draft convention to protect and ban the commercial exploitation of underwater heritage, including archaeological sites and shipwrecks. The meeting, held from 2-7 July 2001 in Paris, is a follow-up of an earlier meeting in March (see Go Between 86).
The draft Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage is the result of four years of negotiations and will be submitted to the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for approval. It has to be approved by two-thirds of UNESCO’s 188 Member States to become an international convention.
In 1997 UNESCO’s General Conference decided that the protection of underwater cultural heritage should be subject to international legislation. The draft convention seeks to protect heritage within the territorial waters of States, on the continental shelf, in countries’ Exclusive Economic Zones and on the deep sea bed.
Issues discussed included sites of spiritual significance and war graves, such as ships that sank during battle. Some participants said that they objected to the granting of special status to shipwrecks that carried slave traders and invading armies.
There was also debate over States’ responsibilities for ships flying their flag that might be undertaking activities that impact upon underwater heritage, and with respect to States’ responsibilities for heritage on the continental shelf off their coasts. Some States were concerned that the Convention could undermine the existing legal order of the 1982 United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea. Participants agreed that the Convention on Underwater Heritage would be interpreted and applied on the basis of international law, including the Convention on the Law of the Sea.
If approved by the General Conference, the Convention will become the first multilateral text on this subject and the fourth heritage convention of UNESCO. The other conventions are the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict; the 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property; and the 1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage.
Contact: Press Service, UNESCO, 7 place de Fontenoy, F-75700 Paris, France, telephone +33-1/45 68 17 44, fax +33-1/45 68 56 52, website (www.unesco.org).
89TH INTERNATIONAL LABOUR CONFERENCE
The International Labour Conference concluded its 89th session on 21 June 2001 following a wide-ranging debate by workers, employers and governments on reducing the decent work deficit in a global economy. Summing up the debate on his report Reducing the Decent Work Deficit, Director-General Juan Somavía told delegates: “If this Conference has a single message, it is that all of us together must now move the Decent Work Agenda from aspiration to action, from design to implementation, from a vision to policy.” He called on the tripartite delegations to pursue their efforts at the national level in order to “highlight the different ways in which decent work is part of the development agenda.”
In addition to the debate of reducing the decent work deficit, delegates gave overwhelming approval to the first labour standard on agricultural safety and health ever, with the aim of protecting the world’s 1.3 billion agricultural workers. The new International Convention on Health and Safety in Agriculture will enter into force once ratified by two ILO Member States. A Recommendation on Health and Safety in Agriculture was also adopted.
In other measures, the Conference made progress in the effort in eliminated forced labour in Myanmar. The Conference moved to send a High-Level Team to Myanmar to conduct an objective assessment of the situation in that country, which has been repeatedly condemned for widespread use of forced labour.
Delegates also discussed a global report on forced labour prepared as part of the follow-up to the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, and examined the Director-General’s report on the condition of workers in the Occupied Arab Territories.
The Conference delegates approved the Director-General’s strategic budget proposals for the 175 Member State organization and adopted a budget of US$434,040,000 for the biennium 2002-2003 to finance ILO activities around the world. As in the previous biennium, the budget is organized around four strategic objectives of principles and rights at work, employment, social protection, and social dialogue, which constitute the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda.
In addition, the Conference launched a new initiative of the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour aimed at greatly accelerating the removal of millions of children from the most abusive forms of child labour in three states–El Salvador, Nepal and Tanzania–in the next ten years.
During the Conference, the ILO’s Working Party on the Social Dimension of Globalization met and agreed on a number of steps to strengthen its action and establish a programme to look at certain issues in depth. The first item in this programme concerns trade liberalization and employment, which will be examined in November. It also agreed that the Working Party should offer a permanent forum for exchange of views and dialogue. The Working Party supported the suggestion that an authoritative report be prepared on the social dimension of globalization under the responsibility of the Director-General. The Working Party will also pursue the idea of creating a world commission of eminent personalities to prepare this report. The Director-General will present a proposal on how this might be done at the next meeting of the ILO Governing Body in November.
Contact: Department of Communication, ILO, 4 route des Morillons, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/799 7940, fax +41-22/799 8577, e-mail <presse@ilo.org>, website (www.ilo.org).
UNESCO EXECUTIVE BOARD
The 161st session of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) Executive Board, chaired by Sonia Mendieta de Badaroux (Honduras), ended on 13 June 2001 after having agreed on a refocused programme as part of the Organization’s reform and several major initiatives notably aiming to protect cultural diversity and the heritage of humanity.
An initiative of reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians launched by Director-General Koïchiro Matsuura at the opening of the session and which aims to start the joint revision of Israeli and Palestinian school textbooks was accepted by both parties.
The session of the Executive Board lifted the last reservations regarding the drafting of a Declaration on cultural diversity. Representatives of Member States requested UNESCO to provide them with principles and reference points to guide States in the design of their cultural policies and in negotiations within other organizations, including the World Trade Organization. To prepare the first draft of this standard-setting instrument–which many delegates said should be “positive and flexible” rather than “defensive and protectionist”–the Board decided to create an open working group, which began meeting on 20 June.
The Board confirmed the importance given by UNESCO to the oral and intangible heritage of humanity. Despite the difficulties inherent in defining this heritage, a first step was recently taken with the first proclamation by the Organization of a list of Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. This initiative will be continued with the development of an international standard-setting instrument designed to protect traditional and popular culture. This new instrument will be comparable to the 1972 UNESCO Convention concerning cultural and natural world heritage sites.
Members of the Executive Board strongly condemned the acts of destruction committed against historical and cultural monuments in Afghanistan and some even considered the possibility of imposing sanctions. The examination of means to prevent such acts, qualified as “crimes against the common heritage of humanity,” will figure on the agenda of the next General Conference in the autumn.
Another decision adopted by the Executive Board covers the proposal to establish the UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education. It entails transforming the International Institute for Infrastructural Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering in Delft (Netherlands) into a UNESCO Institute that will contribute to improving the dissemination and sharing of knowledge concerning water.
The Executive Board examined at length the draft Medium Term Strategy that will guide the Organization over the coming six years. The Strategy, the cornerstone of the reform of UNESCO’s programmes undertaken by Mr. Matsuura, seeks to focus the Organization’s four major programmes around a common theme–contributing to peace and human development in an era of globalization through education, the sciences, culture and communication–with a reduced number of defined strategic results.
The Board also examined the draft Programme and Budget for 2002-2003 totalling US$544 million. This Programme and Budget reflects the decision to set a small number of clear priorities. Five main priorities have been determined–basic education, water resources, the ethics of science and technology, cultural diversity, and equitable access to information and knowledge. The overall budget of the Organization reflects savings of US$26 million and the cutting of some 200 posts at UNESCO headquarters in Paris.
Contact: Press Service, UNESCO, 7 place de Fontenoy, F-75700 Paris, France, telephone +33-1/45 68 17 44, fax +33-1/45 68 56 52, website (www.unesco.org).
UNDP EXECUTIVE BOARD
The Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) held its annual session from 11-22 June 2001 in New York. As a follow-up to a groundbreaking ministerial-level meeting held during the Millennium Summit on 11 September 2000 (see NGLS Roundup 62), UNDP convened ministers of development cooperation and foreign affairs to discuss the organization’s process of reform, need for more resources and strategy for the future.
Addressing the ministerial meeting, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the specific role of UNDP is now far clearer than it was in the past. He said that until recently the UN had tried to do too much by itself in the areas of project finance and project management. Mr. Annan said that from now on, partly because of the reform process underway at UNDP, UN development projects would increasingly have a pilot or leverage character. He went on to say that the UN would not tell any country that the organization could solve its problems. “What we aim to do,” he said, “is help countries find their own way of solving their problems, and help them attract, or mobilize, the resources they need.”
Mr. Annan pointed out what he called UNDP’s “untapped potential” in the area of post-conflict peace-building. He highlighted situations that require more than just emergency relief to fill the gap before large-scale rehabilitation programmes funded by the World Bank and European Union are operational. UNDP is uniquely qualified to fill this gap, Mr. Annan said.
In what seemed to be a response to concerns of some larger developing countries, Mr. Annan concluded by saying that countries continue to turn to UNDP because of an underlying knowledge that it is “not there to further the interests of particular donors, or indeed of donors in general,” but only had a bias in favour of development.
Jan Kavan, Chair of the Executive Board and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, summed up the ministerial meeting by saying that participants had recognized that globalization required UNDP to change its strategies for development. He said participants encouraged UNDP to concentrate on its areas of comparative advantage, which include capacity building in governance and policy, special development situations, and new areas such as information technology and the use of the Internet.
Regarding the UNDP Administrator’s presentation of the organization’s new direction, Mr. Kavan said that ministers had endorsed the role of UNDP as the poverty agency, working both at the global and country levels.
Mr. Kavan noted that many countries stressed the importance of preserving the country-driven nature of UNDP’s programmes. A number of speakers had reminded the meeting that the trust enjoyed by UNDP is due largely to the absence of conditionality attached to its support. Speakers also stressed the importance of partnerships to UNDP’s work. However, some delegations raised concerns that the roles of the United Nations, UNDP and the Bretton Woods Institutions should be maintained and respected, with complementarity ensured through coordination at the country level.
Mr. Kavan said that virtually all speakers had raised concerns on the issue of resources, particularly the importance of rebuilding the core resource base. He noted that a number of major donors had pledged to raise their voluntary contributions during the next year.
The Executive Board also adopted decisions on its work programme. Among these were:
-- endorsing the United Nations Population Fund’s (UNFPA) substantive focus on HIV/AIDS for the years 2001-2005;
-- encouraging UNFPA to build on its experience in addressing gender issues, including the role of men, as an integral part of HIV-prevention activities;
-- emphasizing that the programming process should be country-led and country-driven, and based on national priorities and needs; and
-- reaffirming that the national Government has primary responsibility for the formulation of country programmes.
As part of its Executive Board meeting, UNDP also organized a Civil Society Dialogue to solicit views of civil society organizations (CSOs) and explore UNDP’s potential role in providing alternative policy options and choices in development. Participants expressed support for UNDP, but challenged it to enhance its work on debt cancellation and gender issues, and to re-think its growing relationships with the private sector.
Charles Abugre of the Integrated Social Development Centre (ISODEC) in Ghana, said a post-Enhanced HIPC (Highly Indebted Poor Countries) arrangement for debt relief was needed. He said that under the current mechanism, most countries would not reach sustainable exit points, and that they were subject to a non-transparent and ad hoc process. UNDP could act as an interlocutor to improve this situation, he said.
Clarence Dias of the International Centre for Law and Development raised questions concerning UNDP’s growing relationships with the business community. In particular he suggested that UNDP should not build relationships with the private sector, as was outlined in the UN Secretary-General’s Global Compact initiative that encourages private companies to uphold labour, environmental and human rights standards through voluntary means. He warned that UNDP would abdicate its function of “doing development” if it followed the Global Compact model. He went on to say that the efforts to achieve human rights through development were being jeopardized as a result of aid regimes and the increasing emphasis being placed on the role of trade and investment in development.
Contact: UNDP, 1 UN Plaza, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/906 5000, fax +1-212/906 5364, website (www.undp.org/execbrd/index.htm).
UNOPS DEVELOPS NEW PARTNERSHIPS
The annual Aid and Trade Conference, organized by the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS), included a special meeting on Public Procurement and Reform to examine how governments can:
-- use procurement programmes to achieve environmental goals;
-- enhance efficiency and transparency by taking advantage of e-commerce;
-- respond more quickly and effectively to humanitarian crises; and
-- promote the growth of local supplier communities through capacity building.
The conference was held in New York from 20-21 June 2001.
According to Reinhart Helmke, UNOPS Executive Director, some of the biggest challenges facing developing country procurement are increasing transparency and reducing corruption. This year’s conference examined how new technologies, such as web-based and e-based procurement options, could help in this area and increase the value for money currently being spent. A new challenge, according to Mr. Helmke, is “green procurement” and the need to be responsive to environmental concerns.
Both this year’s conference and UNOPS have taken up not only new issues but also new partnerships. The World Bank was a special partner for Aid and Trade in 2001 because of its involvement in providing loans to developing countries, designed to enhance the capacity of people dealing with procurement in the public sector. UNOPS is planning a conference for late 2001 that will be dedicated to partnerships. In this regard, UNOPS has linked up with the Global Compact office (see Go Between 84) to make the connection between environmental, labour and human rights standards, and its practical work at the project level.
In the field of development, UNOPS is the largest service provider in the UN system, working with more than 30 departments and organizations. It also services bilateral donors, international financial institutions, and developing country governments. In 1999, it delivered services valued over US$500 million involving approximately 2,600 projects. UNOPS deals with procuring goods, equipment and commodities, and also contracts services including economic management, public administration, information systems, drug control, community development and agriculture.
Contact: Jim Provenzano, UNOPS, The Chrysler Building, 405 Lexington Avenue, 4th Floor, New York NY 10174, USA, telephone +1-212/457 4000, fax +1-212/457 4001, e-mail <jamesp@unops.org>, website (www.unops.org) or (www.aidandtrade.com).
WHO TO LAUNCH HEALTH INTERNETWORK INITIATIVE
The World Health Organization (WHO) will work with Project.net, an applications service provider, to launch the pilot phase of the Health InterNetwork Initiative (HIN). HIN is one of four major initiatives identified by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in the Millennium Report (see Go Between 80).
The initiative will involve deploying over 10,000 new public health information access points in 130 developing countries over seven years. It will enhance communication within the public health community and enable effective health service delivery through access to timely national and international information. HIN will include projects in Africa, Central Asia, Eastern Europe, India, Latin America and the Middle East.
The initiative will “establish key alliances in the areas of health information, technology, training, connectivity and infrastructure building,” said Michael Scholtz, Special Representative of the WHO Director-General. “The HIN aims to strengthen public health services, and thus improve health, using Internet technologies.”
Contact: Valery Abramov, Public Information Officer, World Health Organization, 20 avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/791 2543, fax +41-22/791 4858, e-mail <abramovv@who.int>, website (www.who.int).
Jorge Olson, Project.net, 3760 Convoy St., Suite 340, San Diego CA 92111, USA, telephone +1-858/496 8864, fax +1-858/496 8865, e-mail <jorge@project.net>, website (www.project.net).
UNCTAD PROJECTS IN PALESTINE
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) will launch three technical cooperation projects to support Palestinian debt management, customs administration and enterprise development. The projects are part of UNCTAD’s programme of assistance to the Palestinian people and will be carried out in close cooperation with Palestinian institutions.
UNCTAD, with funding from Norway, will assist the Ministry of Finance of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in establishing a Public Debt Directorate. A major part of this work will be installing and providing training in UNCTAD’s Debt Monitoring and Financial Analysis System. The project will be implemented over 18 months and will help the Palestinian Authority manage its debt, estimated to have grown during the recent crisis to over US$900 million. UNCTAD will also help draw up strategic policy guidelines in the area of public debt.
UNCTAD will also assist the PA in developing automated customs systems. The project is to be funded by the Palestinian Economic Council for Reconstruction and Development, which administers the World Bank Technical Assistance Trust Fund on the PA’s behalf. During the first phase of the project, UNCTAD will provide training in customs modernization programmes, and build and install a prototype version of UNCTAD’s Automated Systems for Customs Data (ASYCUDA++).
The third project is to support small and medium-sized entreprise development. The project, funded by the Government of Italy, will be closely coordinated with other bilateral and multilateral programmes in this area. It aims to create new capacities and opportunities for entrepreneurs of small- and medium-sized enterprises, who are especially hard-hit by the ongoing crisis. It also aims to build a client basis for the development finance funds provided by donors through the local banking system.
UNCTAD is also helping the PA to confront the impact of the crisis on the trade sector by training in international commercial diplomacy and advisory services. Over the 2001-2002 biennium, UNCTAD will provide technical assistance to bolster policy making, managerial and institutional capacities of the PA to improve trade, public finance and related services, and help create an enabling environment to mobilize development potentials of the Palestinian private sector.
Contact: Raja Khalidi, Coordinator, Assistance to the Palestinian People, Division on Globalization and Development Strategies, UNCTAD, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/907 5857, fax +41-22/907 0045, e-mail <raja.khalidi@unctad.org>, website (www.unctad.org).
IAEA SAFEGUARDS REVIEW
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reviewed the implementations of its safeguards for 2000. It concluded that in 140 States and Taiwan (Province of China) that have safeguard agreements in force, nuclear material and other items placed under safeguards remained in peaceful nuclear activities or adequately accounted for. IAEA found no indication of diversion of nuclear material or of misuse of facilities or equipment.
However, IAEA was unable to verify the accuracy of the initial report of nuclear material made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), which remains in non-compliance with its safeguard agreement. Although the agreement between IAEA and DPRK remains binding and in force, IAEA is able to implement only some of the required safeguard measures in the country.
IAEA’s safeguard measures in Iraq were implemented from 1991-1998. However, since then the Agency has not been in a position to implement its mandate and cannot provide any assurance that Iraq is in compliance with its obligations. The Agency was, however, able to conduct a physical inventory verification of nuclear material under safeguards.
IAEA continued to strengthen the effectiveness and improve the efficiency of the safeguards system. Work has focused on, among other things, increased access to information about a State’s nuclear and nuclear-related activities; advances in safeguards technology and verification procedures; and increased cooperation with national and regional systems of accounting for and control of nuclear material.
Overall progress on the conclusion and entry into force of the safeguards agreements and additional protocols remains “disappointingly slow.” During 2000, only three new safeguard agreements were concluded, no new agreements entered into force, and only 11 States had additional protocols approved by the board. According to IAEA, the continuing shortage in regular budget funds and reliance on voluntary contributions are of concern because of the unfunded resources needed to maintain credible safeguards and to continue the progress made in strengthening the IAEA safeguards system.
Contact: IAEA, PO Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria, telephone +43-1/26000, fax +43-1/26007, e-mail <Official.Mail@iaea.org>, website (www.iaea.org/worldatom).
MEETING ON BSE
The World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Animal Health Organization (OIE) met for a technical consultation on bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Paris from 11-14 June 2001. Over 150 veterinarians, food safety experts and health officials called upon governments to consider a ban on feeding meat and bone meal to ruminants and to put in place surveillance and testing.
Participants recommended that countries should, among other things:
-- be aware of risks from existing trading patterns and illegal trade in animals and animal products;
-- not be complacent about the risk from BSE;
-- assess the risk of infection in sheep and goats; and
-- evaluate their potential exposure through the systematic assessment of trade data and possible risk factors, and be aware that their trading status may be dependent upon the assessment of BSE risk.
Participants called for additional resources for developing countries to assess exposure from infected materials and to manage the risks associated with exposure. They said that public health is the ultimate goal of risk management, and countries should adopt measures to minimize human exposure to infection. They also said that scientists should communicate new information on the disease, “even though it may be unsettling to the public.”
The OIE has developed guidelines to assess BSE risk. However, participants said that more specific guidance is necessary and that advantage should be taken of the experience of countries and international organizations.
Contact: Erwin Northoff, Media Officer, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, I-00100 Rome, Italy, telephone +39-06/5705 3105, fax +39-06/5705 4975, e-mail <erwin.northoff@fao.org>, website (www.fao.org).
ACTION PLAN ON STURGEONS
At a Standing Committee meeting of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES), key caviar-producing States agreed on a 12-month action plan that includes a halt to sturgeon fishing in the Caspian Sea for the rest of 2001. The action plan is to help restore sturgeon populations to safe levels.
Under the agreement Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Russia have to provide CITES, by 20 July, with a detailed inventory of caviar stored from the spring 2001 harvest. Only this caviar is to be exported.
The action plan gives Caspian States until the end-2001 to:
-- conduct a comprehensive survey of sturgeon stocks;
-- ask Interpol to analyze the illegal sturgeon trade;
-- call on the CITES secretariat (in collaboration with Interpol and the World Customs Organization) to conduct a study of enforcement needs for combating illegal harvesting and trade; and
-- permit and facilitate on-site inspections by CITES of their sturgeon management activities.
The States must also agree on coordinated management of Caspian Sea sturgeon resources, including the joint settings of catch and export quotas for 2002. Any failure of States to implement the agreements will result in zero quotas for 2002.
According to TRAFFIC, the monitoring programme of the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Caspian Sea sturgeon catch has plummeted from 22,000 tons in the late 1970s to 1,100 tons in the 1990s. Reduced river flows, the destruction of spawning sites, corruption, poaching, organized crime and illicit trade have all contributed to the decline. The illegal catch in four States of the former Soviet Union–Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan–is now 10 or 12 times higher than the legal take.
Contact: CITES Secretariat, 15 chemin des Anèmones, CH-1219 Chatelâine (Geneva), Switzerland, telephone +41-22/917 8139 or 917 8140, fax +41-22/797 3417, e-mail <cites@unep.ch>, website (www.cites.org).
PLAN FOR CONSERVATION OF TURTLES
Under the auspices of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), eight countries have agreed to a wide-ranging plan to conserve six key species of turtles at risk from overharvesting in the Indian Ocean and waters of Southeast Asia. The countries agreed to 24 programmes and 105 projects to reverse the decline of loggerhead, olive ridley, green, hawksbill, leatherback and flatback turtles throughout the region.
A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the subject was agreed in Manila at the Conference on the Conservation and Management of Marine Turtles of the Indian Ocean from 20-23 June 2001. The MoU was signed by Australia, Comoros, Iran, Myanmar, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Tanzania and the United States. Others are expected to do so after review by the responsible government authorities.
The Memorandum of Understanding, which has a potential coverage of some 40 countries, will come into effect on 1 September 2001. Signatories will hold their first formal meeting in the second quarter of 2002. The conference also approved a proposal to establish an advisory committee and a secretariat in Bangkok to help coordinate activities under the MoU.
Turtles have existed for millions of years and are an important component of the marine ecosystem. They also bring in money to the local communities because they attract tourists and conservationists. However, they are harvested for their meat and eggs, and levels of harvest are frequently unsustainable. Their nests and feeding areas are also threatened, and they are often accidental bycatch in fishing operations.
Contact: Secretariat of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), Martin-Luther-King-Strasse 8, D-53175 Bonn, Germany, telephone +49-228/815 2401, fax +49-228/815 2449, e-mail <cms@unep.de>, website (www.unep-wcmc.org/cms).
UN-NGO COOPERATION
GLOBAL REPORT ON CHILD SOLDIERS 2001
The Global Report on Child Soldiers 2001, prepared by the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, was launched at UN headquarters in New York on 12 June 2001. The report provides statistics and outlines the situations faced by more than 300,000 children worldwide, some as young as seven years old, who are being recruited to active fighting duty.
While the use of child soldiers has decreased in Latin America, the Balkans and the Middle East in recent years, “new generations of children are at risk in Africa and parts of Asia and the Pacific,” according to the report, which cites 87 countries in which children are being recruited by national and armed rebel groups. Myanmar has the world’s highest number, with 50,000 child soldiers.
The report was introduced by Jo Becker, the Chair of the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, and Jean-Claude Legrand, Senior Advisor on Children and Armed Conflict to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).
Ms. Becker linked the rise in the number of child soldiers with the manufacture and trade in small arms, which she said has resulted in children being placed in frontline positions. “The widespread availability of modern lightweight weapons has contributed to the child soldier problem, enabling even the smallest child to become an efficient killer in combat,” she said, noting that children are also being used as minesweepers, spies, porters and sex slaves.
Ms. Becker observed that while in the past the recourse to recruiting children for military service was blamed on a shortage of adult men, children were now deliberately being targeted for recruitment because they were seen as cheap and expendable and could be drugged and indoctrinated with ease. She noted that children are now often recruited from refugee camps and trafficked across borders directly into situations of armed conflict. Ms. Becker also noted that many of today’s adult soldiers started as children, and that in some countries, such as Angola, the second generation of child soldiers was already in service.
Mr. Legrand addressed efforts to demobilize and reintegrate child soldiers. He emphasized that unlike past efforts in Mozambique and Uganda, current efforts were underway in situations where no peace process or structure was in place, where in fact many groups were still actively and often forcibly recruiting children. He stressed that it was no longer possible to wait for peace processes, that conditionality for demobilization should be refused, and that pressure needed to be exerted to ensure immediate access to children being used in combat. “These children are victims,” Mr. Legrand said and noted that their care should be disconnected from disarmament and handled with a humanitarian and culturally appropriate approach. He also underscored the gravity of the situation for girls, who are often denied access to both demobilization and humanitarian efforts.
Mr. Legrand noted that child soldiering was increasingly linked to trafficking, with children being abducted from one country and exported to zones of conflict in others. He pointed out that those training children for combat should not be the only ones taken to task, but that those providing “training for the trainers” should also be identified and held accountable. Mr. Legrand praised the efforts of NGOs like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International for their invaluable information collecting in such risky situations, but cautioned that in many countries, including India, for example, recruitment of children was largely being ignored.
Both Ms. Becker and Mr. Legrand emphasized the need for a serious long-term commitment to address the issue. Mr. Legrand cautioned that the UN had to be modest and careful, however, about its capacity to provide education, access to basic services, and income-generating projects. He said that governments and the UN system should address the situation of all children in countries suffering from armed conflict, not just the child soldiers. Ms. Becker called on governments to sign and ratify the Operational Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict.
Contact: Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, United Nations, New York 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963 1261, fax +1-212/963 0807, website (www.un.org/special-rep/children-armed-conflict).
Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, PO Box 22696, London N4 3ZJ, UK, telephone +44-20/7226 0606, fax +44-227226 0208, e-mail <info@child-soldiers.org>, website (www.child-soldiers.org).
MEETING ON PALESTINE
The occupation of the Palestinian territory is “the single most prohibitive obstacle to peace,” according to a United Nations Non-Governmental Organization Meeting in Solidarity with the Palestinian People. The meeting, which was held from 17-18 July 2001 in Madrid (Spain) and sponsored by Palestinian Rights Committee, requested the UN to convene an international meeting on the protection of Palestinian people. Participants included experts, Committee members, representatives of UN agencies, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, and members of the press.
The request was part of the Plan of Action, which was adopted at the meeting. The Plan of Action stressed that the immediate protection of Palestinian people was an imperative. Participants proposed an international civil society corps of volunteers to monitor events on the ground and to participate with Palestinian and Israeli NGOs in actions opposing the occupation. They also asked for more frequent consultations between the UN and NGO networks and coordinating bodies.
Ibra Deguène Ka, Committee Chair, called for urgent action by all sectors of the international community to bring the peace process back on track, and called on governments to support the deployment of international observers throughout the Palestinian territory.
The meeting was organized into three plenaries on the Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts, the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, and “the road to peace.” Participants discussed, among other things, the Madrid peace process, the Oslo accords and recent developments in the peace process.
On 19 July, in a session sponsored by the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, participants reviewed the work of NGOs worldwide and discussed action-oriented proposals and mechanisms for their implementation. They emphasized the need to raise awareness on the occupation and suggested several campaigns to “make the occupation visible.”
Contact: Division For Palestinian Rights, Room S-3350 United Nations, New York NY 10017, USA, fax +1-212/963 4199, e-mail <unispal@un.org>, website (www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/dpr.htm).
NGO UPDATE
WORLD DISASTER REPORT 2001
International aid for disasters that does not take into account the victims’ economic and social needs fails to help protect them from future disasters, according to a report published by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC).
World Disasters Report 2001 calls for a change in the way aid is allocated. It says that aid donors tend to focus mainly on rebuilding damaged infrastructure rather than on social and economic recovery. This results in short-term solutions rather than helping prepare affected people to deal with future disasters. A survey cited by the report found that 53% of aid projects focused on rebuilding infrastructure and only 10% on economic recovery.
Another problem with aid is that there is a “widespread leakage” of aid dollars from disaster-stricken countries. In Bangladesh, for example, 60% of the funds from the Flood Action Plan (1990-1995) were used to pay foreign consultants. The report also criticizes approaches to aid that undermine local economies, such as tied aid and the funding gap between emergency, rehabilitation and development programmes.
“Aid needs to be used to rebuild local economies and communities,” said Astrid Heiberg, IFRC President. “To do that, donors need to understand the links between relief, rehabilitation and development and to involve local people more in determining the kind of help they need.”
The report says that it is important to look at the root causes of natural disasters. Many so-called natural catastrophes are “un-natural”: they are exacerbated by man-made problems such as global warming, unplanned urbanization and political mismanagement.
Contact: Marie-Françoise Borel, Information Officer, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, PO Box 372, CH-1211 Geneva 19, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/730 4346, fax +41-22/733 0395, e-mail <secretariat@ifrc.org>, website (www.ifrc.org/publicat/wdr2001).
FOEE CAMPAIGN ON PEACEFUL PROTEST
Friends of the Earth Europe (FoEE) has launched a campaign to defend the public right to peaceful protest. The campaign is aimed at preventing violence at major international summits and meetings of world financial and trade bodies. FoEE said that it was challenging politicians and the media to listen and respond to public concern, and challenging the protest movement to demonstrate peacefully for constructive change.
FoEE has set out five principles for peaceful protest:
--NGOs must strengthen their commitment to peaceful protest;
--governments must listen to citizens’ concerns about corporate globalization and other issues, and help provide means for citizens to express their concerns;
--police forces must facilitate peaceful protests and react sensitively to protest events;
--the media must report on the real issues of concern instead of focusing on violent incidents or official government statements;
--people who attend protests must take personal responsibility for their actions–violent behaviour is not acceptable.
FoEE has promised action, in collaboration with other NGOs, to contest any attempt to curtail the public’s right to peaceful protest, using the law when necessary.
Contact: Martin Rocholl, Friends of the Earth Europe, 29 rue Blanche, B-1060 Brussels, Belgium, telephone +32-2/542 0183, fax +32-2/537 5596, e-mail <info@foeeurope.org>, website (www.foeeurope.org).
OTHER NEWS
SYSTEM TO TRACK CONFLICT DIAMONDS AGREED ON
Delegates from 34 countries agreed to adopt a system to track diamonds from mines to the marketplace at a meeting held in Moscow from 2-5 July 2001.
The meeting, which was attended by countries exporting and trading in diamonds, as well as representatives of the World Diamond Council, European Commission and NGOs, was part of the Kimberley Process, an international effort aimed at working out a set of minimum standards to certify that diamonds exported from producer countries are legal and not being sold to fund wars. The tracking system would help prevent illegal trade in “blood diamonds” that are used to fund wars in Africa.
The system would involve the use of certificates based on national control that would accompany uncut diamonds from the mines. Until now, diamond trading requires documentation stating only the country from which the gemstone was last exported.
The system also includes a monitoring mechanism, which will be further discussed at a meeting in London in September. According to Nchakha Moloi, Special Adviser to the South African Ministry of Minerals and Energy, the measures would not raise costs for producers or consumers.
Participants will report on progress made to the United Nations General Assembly later this year.
Contact: Partnership Africa Canada, 323 Chapel Street, 3rd Floor, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1N 7Z2, telephone +1-613/237 6768 or 728 9725, fax +1-613/237 6530, e-mail <pac@web.apc.org>.
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BIOTECHNOLOGY
An international conference on New Biotechnology Food and Crops: Science, Safety and Society called for stakeholders to commit to greater transparency on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and for governments to increase their support for independent and publicly funded scientific research into the risks and benefits of GM foods and crops.
The conference, held in Bangkok from 10-12 July 2001, was organized by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Government of the United Kingdom, in cooperation with the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Government of Thailand. It brought together over 300 participants from more than 50 countries, including scientists, and representatives of governments, civil society, industry, agriculture and the media.
Issues discussed included the role of stakeholders–including consumer and environmental groups–in national and international decision making, and the need to assist countries in building relevant research, production and regulatory capacity in this area.
According to Herwig Schlögl, OECD Deputy Secretary-General, the conference enabled participants to find common ground in some areas despite a broad divergence of views on many issues. The fact that differences remain is quite understandable, he said. “We are dealing with issues that will determine our future: the future of human beings and the future of our environment.”
The chair, the Earl of Selbourne, Chairman of the UK Chemicals Stakeholder Forum, summed up the conference by emphasizing the need for greater transparency from all participants so as to be able to hold a constructive dialogue on the risks and benefits of new biotechnology. He stressed the importance of high quality, accessible and relevant science in support of risk assessment, and the need for governments to get involved in this area. “Publicly funded research provides greater confidence [than privately funded research] and might be easier to channel into regions for which no financial return on the research investment can be expected.”
The conference made six recommendations for promoting increased transparency and improved stakeholder confidence.
--Governments and industry should prepare dossiers not just to satisfy the regulatory process but to meet in part their duty of accountability to society.
--Intergovernmental organizations and national bodies concerned with the new biotechnology should commit to attending appropriate stakeholder fora.
--Organizations should review their own approaches to transparency as well as approaches of other organizations with which they relate.
--Research should be carried out on ways to monitor GMOs in the environment, and intergovernmental organizations should be proactive in harmonizing guidelines in this field.
--An accelerated, internationally coordinated programme of capacity-building activities should be initiated.
--Governments should retain an acceptable balance between public and private research funding for biosafety application.
The Chairman’s Conclusions of the conference were presented to the G-8 Summit in Genoa in July. The communiqué of the Summit acknowledged the conclusions and encouraged the “responsible use of biotechnology in addressing development needs.”
Contact: Peter Kearns, Principal Administrator for Biosafety, ENV/EHS, OECD, 2 rue André-Pascal, F-75775 Paris Cédex 16, France, telephone +33-1/45 24 16 77, fax +33-1/45 24 16 75, e-mail <peter.kearns@oecd.org>, website (www.oecd.org/ehs).
FATF REPORT ON MONEY LAUNDERING
In its annual report, the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) listed 19 countries that it says are not cooperating with global efforts to stop money laundering. It said that it would enact countermeasures, including the possibility of enhanced surveillance and reporting of financial transactions, against three of the countries–Nauru, Philippines and Russia–unless they took significant legal measures to address the problem by 30 September 2001.
The 19 countries blacklisted are Cook Islands, Dominica, Egypt, Guatemala, Hungary, Indonesia, Israel, Lebanon, Marshall Islands, Myanmar, Nauru, Nigeria, Niue, Philippines, Russia, St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. FATF has removed the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, Liechtenstein and Panama from the list on non-cooperating countries but will be monitoring them closely.
Financial institutions and economic experts estimate that between US$600 billion and 1.5 trillion generated by organized crime is laundered worldwide each year. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), “the aggregate size of money laundering globally...could be somewhere between two and five percent of the world’s domestic product.”
The Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering also supports the development of regional anti-money laundering bodies, such as the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering for South America (GAFISUD), which was established in Latin America in December 2000.
The task force is an independent body established in 1989 to examine measures to combat money laundering. It has a membership of 29 countries and two organizations–the European Commission and the Gulf Co-operation Council.
Contact: Secretariat, Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering, 37 bis Boulevard Suchet, F-75016 Paris, France, telephone +33-1/45 24 79 45, fax +33-1/45 24 17 60, e-mail <fatf.contact@oecd.org>, website (www.oecd.org/fatf).
CONGRESS ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN
Momentum continues to build for the Second World Congress Against the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (SWC), to be held in Yokohama (Japan) from 17-20 December 2001. Children and young people will also participate and will meet for a special youth event from 13-16 December in Kawasaki, close to Yokohama (see Go Between 85).
The main themes of the Congress are:
--child pornography;
--prevention, protection and recovery of children from sexual exploitation;
--trafficking in children;
--role and involvement of the private sector;
--legislation and law enforcement; and
--the profile of the sex exploiter.
During the past year, papers on each of these themes have been prepared and will be posted on the SWC website in September.
NGO participation, while welcomed by the organizers, is limited to 800 adult NGO representatives and 100 youth. Youth participants will be equally distributed between Japanese youth and young people proposed by the international NGO ECPAT (End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes) and the Geneva-based NGO Group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). NGOs may organize workshops, a process coordinated by the NGO Group for the CRC and ECPAT. A list of NGO events will be ready by September. The SWC website (see below) will provide information on participation criteria for NGOs, guidelines on youth participation and registration forms.
During the second half of 2001 UNICEF, in cooperation with partner organizations, will organize a number of regional preparatory meetings:
--United States/Canada/Mexico, 1-2 October 2001 (to be confirmed), Washington DC (USA);
--East Asia and the Pacific, 16-18 October 2001, Bangkok (Thailand);
--Africa and the Middle East, 29-30 October 2001, Casablanca (Morocco);
--South Asia, 5-6 November 2001, Dhaka (Bangladesh);
--Latin America and the Caribbean, 7-9 November 2001, Montevideo (Uruguay); and
--Western/Eastern Europe and Central Asia, 20-21 November 2001, Budapest (Hungary).
The SWC is organized by the Government of Japan, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), ECPAT, and the NGO Group for the CRC.
Contacts:
NGO enquiries: Hélène Sackstein, Coordinator, Focal Point on Sexual Exploitation of Children, NGO Group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child, c/o Defence for Children International, PO Box 88, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/740 4711, fax +41-22/740 1145, e-mail <info@focalpointngo.org>, website (www.focalpointngo.org). The Focal Point produces a newsletter on the SWC and regional preparatory meetings.
Intergovernmental enquiries: Gopalan Balagopal, Senior Adviser, Child Protection Unit, UNICEF, UNICEF House, 3 UN Plaza, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/824 6632, fax +1-212/824 6473, e-mail <gbalagopal@unicef.org>, website (www.unicef.org).
Regional preparatory conferences
Latin America and the Caribbean: <iin@redfacil.com.uy> and <mconde@unicef.org>.
Western and Eastern Europe: <jnelson@unicef.org> and <jreichenberg@unicef.org>.
East Asia and the Pacific: <mdemonchy@unicef.org>.
Africa and the Middle East: <odegreef@unicef.org>.
FOCUS
HR SUB-COMMISSION: DISCRIMINATION, REPARATIONS FOR SLAVERY, WOMEN
The United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights held its 53rd annual session in Geneva from 30 July to 17 August 2001. The Sub-Commission is composed of 26 independent experts elected by the Commission on Human Rights, which it serves as a think tank. The Sub-Commission adopted more than 45 resolutions and decisions, and discussed reports or working papers, on questions that included reparations for the slave trade, and rights of minorities, indigenous peoples and women.
Racial Discrimination, Reparations for Slavery
The Sub-Commission unanimously adopted Resolution 2001/1 on Recognition of responsibility and reparation for massive and flagrant violations of human rights which constituted crimes against humanity and which took place during the period of slavery, of colonialism and wars of conquest. In the resolution the experts took a clear stance in calling slavery a “crime against humanity” for which “solemn and formal recognition and reparation” should be provided, including a “material aspect,” such as “rehabilitation of the peoples affected, active cooperation in development,…debt cancellation [or] implementation of the ‘Tobin tax.’” The resolution also requests all countries concerned to “take initiatives which would assist, notably through debate on the basis of accurate information, in the raising of public awareness of the disastrous consequences of periods of slavery and colonialism.” During the debate, Sub-Commission expert Françoise Jane Hampson (United Kingdom) suggested that for direct compensation to be appropriate, either the victim or the next of kin of the victim had to still be alive, and the acts had to have been unlawful at the time.
The adoption of Resolution 2001/1 was particularly timely, as the 53rd session of the Sub-Commission coincided with the third meeting of the Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) for the WCAR held in the same building. At the PrepCom, reparations for the transatlantic slave trade was one of the most intensely debated issues.
The Sub-Commission also addressed the issue of caste-based discrimination and discussed the working paper by one of its experts, Rajendra Kalidas Wimala Goonesekere (Sri Lanka), on the topic of discrimination based on work and descent (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/16). Ambassador Savitri Kunadi of India disputed some of the findings in the working paper, saying that it failed to take note of the progress that India had made in eliminating caste-based discrimination, including affirmative action programmes. Commending the study, Smita Narulla of Human Rights Watch said that despite formal protection of lower-caste individuals in domestic law, discriminatory treatment remained endemic and discriminatory societal norms continued to be reinforced. The debate on Mr. Goonesekere’s working paper also addressed the question of whether discrimination based on descent should be discussed at the WCAR, over which the Sub-Commission appeared divided. Experts adopted Decision 2001/110 mandating Mr. Goonesekere to prepare an expanded working paper on the topic of discrimination based on work and descent in other regions of the world.
Violence Against Women
After reviewing a recent report from the High Commissioner for Human Rights on Systematic Rape, Sexual Slavery and Slavery-Like Practices During Armed Conflicts (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/29), which calls for an end to impunity for acts of sexual violence and sexual slavery during armed conflict, the Sub-Commission adopted Resolution 2001/20 on the issue. The resolution recalls the recent developments in international law, which say that sexual violence and sexual slavery committed in the context of armed conflict may constitute crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. Resolution 2001/20 also calls upon States to provide criminal penalties for perpetrators and compensation for victims, and to promote human rights education on the issue.
The Sub-Commission reviewed an annual report of one of one of its experts, Halima Embarek Warzazi (Morocco), on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and the Girl Child (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/27). The report states, among other things, that female genital mutilation is a real public health problem considering its extent and its harmful consequences for the health of women and girls, and that it is not a practice prescribed by Islam. In introducing her report, Ms. Warzazi said that while such problems continued, most countries had been courageous enough to recognize the harmful effects of such practices and that public information programmes carried out by governments and NGOs had contributed to a slow but sure change of mentalities. The Sub-Commission subsequently adopted Resolution 2001/13 on the issue, appealing to all States concerned as well as to NGOs to intensify efforts to develop awareness of harmful traditional practices affecting the health of women and the girl child.
As it did last year, the Sub-Commission in Resolution 2001/15 condemned all forms of discrimination and violations of the human rights of women in territories controlled by Afghan armed groups.
Rights of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples
Under its agenda item on prevention of discrimination and protection of indigenous peoples and minorities, the Sub-Commission adopted Resolution 2001/9, calling for consideration be given to an international year for the world’s minorities; to the possible appointment of a Special Rapporteur on minority issues; and to the possible establishment of a voluntary trust fund to aid the participation of minority representatives and experts from developing countries in the activities of the Sub-Commission’s Working Group on Minorities.
Regarding indigenous peoples the Sub-Commission, among other things, adopted Resolution 2001/12, recommending that the High Commissioner for Human Rights organize, in collaboration with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the World Trade Organization and other relevant international organizations, a workshop on indigenous peoples, private sector natural resource, energy and mining companies and human rights. It also invited the High Commissioner to convene a conference on indigenous peoples issues with the theme “Rio+10.”
For contact, see following story.
HR SUB-COMMISSION: GLOBAL ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE
On 7-8 August, the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights engaged in a substantive dialogue with senior representatives of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and World Trade Organization (WTO) in the context of a general debate on human rights and globalization. A key question that was debated was whether international economic institutions are bound by international human rights law.
The Sub-Commission reviewed the progress report (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/10) of the two Special Rapporteurs on Globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of human rights, Deepika Udagama and Joseph Oloka-Onyangu. The report examines potential complementarities and conflicts between the rules and policies of international trade and financial institutions on one hand, and international human rights principles and norms on the other. The report focuses specifically on the WTO’s agreement on trade-related intellectual property rights (TRIPs), its dispute settlement system, and the poverty-reduction initiatives of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), in the context of the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Debt Initiative.
The IMF representative said that, strictly speaking, the Fund is not bound by international human rights declarations and covenants, particularly since these are not reflected in its Articles of Agreement. However, he argued, in practice the IMF was playing an active role in promoting human rights, notably through its poverty-reduction strategies, and in promoting a reduced role of the State in economic activity, which he said helped “empower civil society.” He further argued that the current IMF/World Bank initiated Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) process is genuinely different from the earlier generations of structural adjustment programmes, notably through its emphasis on country ownership. The PRSPs are fully government-owned, he said, but whether they are financed by IMF/World Bank funds remains the prerogative of those institutions’ governing boards.
The representative of the World Bank said he recognized that economic policies were not neutral in terms of their human rights impact, but at the same time it was essential to recognize that economic development was an essential factor in the realization of human rights, particularly economic and social rights.
Human Rights Responsibilities of IFIs
Several Sub-Commission members questioned the argument that international economic institutions are not bound by international human rights law. This would be further addressed in the final report of the Special Rapporteurs to be submitted at next year’s session of the Sub-Commission, in the form of guidelines on the human rights responsibilities of international financial institutions (IFIs).
The discussion revealed a number of questions around this issue, including whether IFIs–as specific institutional entities and irrespective of their internal constitutions–are bound by international human rights law; whether the fact that most IFI Member States are bound by human rights treaties implies that their more influential and powerful members should abstain from promoting or condoning loan policy conditions that would in effect force a recipient State to violate its human treaty obligations; and the need for recipient States to demonstrate their efforts in upholding their human rights treaty obligations when negotiating with IFIs.
Other questions included whether possible guidelines on IFI human rights responsibilities should be restricted to “respecting” human rights (in other words not imposing economic policy conditions that in practice could undermine national governments efforts to protect and promote human rights), or whether such guidelines should be extended to giving IFIs a role in “protecting” and “promoting” human rights (which could raise potential concerns related to the use of aid conditionality).
The WTO and Human Rights
One of the WTO representatives attending the meeting said that the WTO and its members were bound by international law and Member States were expected to respect their human rights obligations. She stressed that WTO agreements cannot be treated in “clinical isolation” from public international law, including international human rights law, which she described as being of a “higher normative quality.” Members of the WTO’s dispute settlement panel and appellate body were expected to take other treaty obligations into account, but their role was limited to determining whether a particular case brought before them by a Member State was in breach of WTO rules, not international human rights law.
On the question of TRIPs and its impact on the human right to health, another WTO representative noted that Member States have been engaged this year “to ensure that TRIPs is part of the solution and not part of the problem” in the public health crises facing developing countries (see Go Between 86).
Resolutions on TRIPs and GATS
Last year, the Sub-Commission had adopted Resolution 2000/7 on intellectual property rights and human rights, which stated that “there are apparent conflicts between the intellectual property rights regime embodied in the TRIPs Agreement on the one hand, and international human rights law on the other,” and requested the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to undertake an analysis of the human rights impacts of the TRIPs Agreement (see NGLS Roundup 61).
The report (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/13), which was submitted at this year’s session, stresses that there is a fundamental difference between the protection and promotion of human rights and the overall thrust of the TRIPs Agreement. The report notes that: “The various links with the subject matter of human rights–the promotion of public health, nutrition, environment and development–are generally expressed in terms of exceptions to the rule rather than the guiding principles themselves and are made subject to the provisions of the Agreement. A human rights approach, on the other hand, would explicitly place the promotion and protection of human rights, in particular those of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, at the heart of the objectives of intellectual property protection, rather than only as permitted exceptions that are subordinated to the other provisions of the Agreement.”
As a follow-up step, the Sub-Commission adopted Resolution 2001/21 which among other matters, “urges all Governments to take fully into account existing State obligations under international human rights instruments in the formulation of proposals for the ongoing review of the TRIPs Agreement, in particular in the context of the Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization to be held in Doha in November 2001.”
The Sub-Commission also discussed the potential human rights impact of the WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and ongoing negotiations on liberalization of trade in services, particularly in the area of health and education. In Resolution 2001/4, the Sub-Commission calls upon governments and international economic policy forums “actively to ensure that, in the formulation, interpretation and implementation of policies in relation to the liberalization of trade in services, the liberalization of trade in services does not negatively impact on the enjoyment of human rights by all persons without discrimination.” The resolution further requests OHCHR to submit a report on the human rights implications of this process, particularly in the framework of GATS.
Renewing TNCs Working Group Mandate
In Resolution 2001/3, the Sub-Commission decided to extend for another three years the mandate of its sessional working group on the working methods and activities of transnational corporations (TNCs). The working group’s updated mandate includes:
--compiling a list of the various relevant instruments and norms concerning human rights and international cooperation that are applicable to TNCs;
--contributing to the drafting of relevant norms concerning human rights and TNCs and other economic units whose activities have an impact on human rights;
--analyzing the possibility of establishing a monitoring mechanism in order to apply sanctions and obtain compensation for infringements committed and damage caused by TNCs, and contribute to the drafting of binding norms for that purpose; and
--studying the effects of competition among TNCs, such as mergers, purchase and resale of companies, and the oligopoly system, on the enjoyment of human rights and on the development choice of peoples, together with their compatibility with international human rights law, particularly with regard to the sovereignty of States and the right to development.
First Social Forum in 2002
On 13 August the Sub-Commission held a panel on the potential role and structure of the Forum on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Social Forum), which will hold its first session in 2002. The proposal to hold an annual Social Forum resulted from the study of Sub-Commission member José Bengoa on the relationship between globalization, income distribution and its impact on human rights (see NGLS Roundup, November 1998) and was approved at the last session of the Commission on Human Rights this year.
Among the panelists, the Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Rubens Ricupero, said that the spreading movement against certain trends of globalization means that global economic decisions cannot be treated in isolation from their impact on human rights and other moral values. “They have to be defined and applied only in connection with their foreseeable impact on the well-being [and] human rights of all people likely to be affected by them, particularly the most vulnerable members of society.” He said that when the Social Forum becomes a reality next year, it may become apparent that not all desirable goals and aspirations will prove compatible at the same time. Cases of conflict between economic and social values will imply trade-offs such as foregoing some economic efficiency gains “in order to respect human or moral values of a higher order.”
In Resolution 2001/24, the Sub-Commission decided that the annual sessions of the Social Forum will serve to:
--exchange information on the relationship between processes of globalization and the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights;
--follow up on situations of poverty and destitution throughout the world;
--propose standards and initiatives of a juridical nature, guidelines and other recommendations; and
--follow up the agreements reached at major world conferences and the Millennium Summit, and make contributions to forthcoming major international events and discussions related to the mandate of the Social Forum.
In particular, the Sub-Commission decided to extend an invitation to participate in the Forum not only to NGOs in consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) but to other non-governmental organizations, “particularly newly emerging actors in the South, such as smaller groups, grassroots organizations, voluntary, youth associations, community organizations, trade unions and associations of workers.” The invitation is also extended to representatives of the private sector, United Nations agencies, relevant ECOSOC functional and regional commissions, international financial institutions and development agencies.
The theme for the first session of the Social Forum will be “the relationship between poverty reduction and the realization of the right to food.” The exact dates depend on whether the Commission on Human Rights will approve the holding of the Forum as a pre-sessional meeting (implying extra-budgetary resources) before the August 2002 session of the Sub-Commission.
Contact: Geunnadi Lebakine, Secretary of the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/017 9328, fax +41-22/917 9011, e-mail <glebakine.hchr@unog.ch>, website (www.unhchr.ch).
FORUM ON FORESTS ADOPTS PROGRAMME OF WORK AND PLAN OF ACTION
Following two weeks of negotiations in New York, the first session of the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF-1) reached agreement on the highly contested Multi-Year Programme of Work, the Plan of Action (POA) for the implementation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) and Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF) proposals for action, and the Initiation of the Work of UNFF with the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF).
The first session of UNFF, held from 11-23 June 2001, continued to link the environmental, economical and social considerations, and the cross-sectoral nature of forest issues. Instead of focusing only on issues of moist tropical forests, UNFF-1 also considered all forest types and the concerns of low forest cover countries (LFCCs). While UNFF-1’s work was largely organizational, it proved contentious because its outcomes would shape the nature of substantive discussions at future sessions. However, all governments stressed the importance of UNFF as the central intergovernmental forum to deliberate international forest policy and advance sustainable forest management in an international context. They also welcomed the establishment of the CPF and gave support and guidance to its work. All CPF members attended UNFF-1 and reaffirmed their strong commitment to and support for the work of UNFF.
Established as a subsidiary body of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), UNFF is the successor to the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (1995-96) and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (1997-2000) and is open to all Member States. The main aims of UNFF are to facilitate and promote the implementation of the IPF/IFF proposals for action as well as measures agreed upon through national forest programmes. UNFF also serves as a forum for continued policy development and dialogue among governments, international organizations and Major Groups.
Some delegations said the non-binding nature of the outcomes of the session, particularly on monitoring and reporting, meant this framework would be too weak to effect significant changes in forest policy. Others, primarily developing countries, however, preferred to keep UNFF focused on national forest policies and the right of individual countries to devise their own strategies. This is reflected in many elements of the POA and the Multi-Year Programme of Work, which do not compel countries to take particular action but instead stress the voluntary nature of compliance. A Northern delegate suggested that the weakness of UNFF’s current programme of work may eventually create a stronger basis on which to build the case for a legal instrument for all types of forests, or a “forest convention.” Subject to its review, UNFF is expected to consider the question of a convention in five years.
Different priorities within the Group of 77 developing countries
(G-77) made it difficult for the group to present united positions on issues such as prioritizing special status for Low Forest Cover Countries. Some developing countries felt that the G-77, led by Iran, prioritized LFCCs at the expense of some other issues like trade. However, despite these difficulties, developing countries managed to get financial resources, international cooperation in capacity building, and access to and transfer of environmentally sound technologies included in the POA as important tools for the implementation of IPF/IFF proposals for action.
Multi-Year Programme of Work
UNFF, as decided by ECOSOC, will work on the basis of a multi-year programme of work. Negotiations centred on developing this programme with concrete initiatives on implementation as well as creating a forum for policy guidance and coordination.
Each session will focus on specific forest-related elements including:
UNFF-2 (2002)
--Ministerial Segment
--Combating deforestation and forest degradation
--Forest conservation and protection of unique types of forests and fragile ecosystems
--Rehabilitation and conservation strategies for countries with low forest cover
--Rehabilitation and restoration of degraded lands
UNFF-3 (2003)
--Economic aspects of forests
--Forest health and productivity
--Maintaining forest cover to meet present and future needs
UNFF-4 (2004)
--Traditional forest-related knowledge
--Forest-related scientific knowledge
--Social and cultural aspects of forests
UNFF-5 (2005)
--Ministerial Segment
--Parameters of a mandate for developing a legal framework on all types of forests
--Effectiveness of the international arrangements for forests
Common items for each session include multi-stakeholder dialogues; country experiences and lessons learned; emerging issues relevant to country implementation; monitoring, assessment and reporting; implementation of the POA; national forest programmes; trade; and an enabling environment.
In order to generate strong political commitment to the issues of sustainable forest management, UNFF decided to hold a ministerial segment at both the second and fifth sessions. The main role of the first ministerial segment will be to endorse the Plan of Action as a contribution to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) preparatory process.
Recognizing the need for scientific and technical advice, UNFF recommended convening three ad hoc expert groups, which will focus on approaches and mechanisms for monitoring, assessment and reporting; finance and transfer of environmentally sound technologies; and parameters of a mandate for developing a legal framework on all types of forests.
Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues
UNFF stressed the importance of involvement by Major Groups from both developed and developing countries. It also built upon the practice of the Commission on Sustainable Development, IPF and IFF, and established Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues to be held at each session. Relevant stakeholders are invited to contribute to discussions through, among other things, case studies.
There was some concern that NGOs would be unable to obtain accreditation with ECOSOC in time to participate in upcoming UNFF sessions. The United States and New Zealand proposed that NGOs be accredited directly to UNFF on an exceptional basis. This was opposed by the G-77, and governments agreed instead to request the UNFF secretariat to expedite applications for ECOSOC accreditation.
Collaborative Partnership on Forests
The CPF was established in April 2001 in response to ECOSOC’s invitation to executive heads of relevant organizations to form a collaborative partnership on forests. The CPF membership has now expanded to ten members: the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); Secretariat of the Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD); Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR); UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA); UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO); Global Environment Facility (GEF); International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO); United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP); and the World Bank.
The CPF’s work will include facilitating countries’ capacity to provide forest-related information, and providing expertise and advisory services to UNFF.
At the meeting UNDP said its Programme on Forests was being re-established as a collaborative effort involving the World Bank, FAO, bilateral agencies and NGOs, and will be hosted by the World Bank.
Plan of Action
Governments agreed that the POA is a holistic and comprehensive response to the call for action to advance the implementation of the IPF/IFF proposals for action. According to the POA, responsibility for implementation of the proposals for action rests at the national, regional, sub-regional and international levels, depending on the proposals.
The 16 elements identified by UNFF as important tools for the implementation of the IPF/IFF proposals for action include:
--formulation and implementation of national forest programmes;
--promoting public participation;
--traditional forest-related knowledge;
--criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management;
--economic, social and cultural aspects of forests;
--forest conservation and protection of unique types of forests and fragile ecosystems;
--financial resources;
--international trade and sustainable forest management; and
--international cooperation in capacity building, and access to and transfer of environmentally sound technologies to support sustainable forest management.
With regard to financial resources and other means of implementation, UNFF said that the provision of technical assistance, technology transfer, capacity building and financial resources, particularly to developing countries as well as countries with economies in transition, is essential to the implementation of IPF/IFF proposals for action. It was also decided that financial issues should be an integral part of UNFF’s work. This includes trade issues in particular because buying and selling wood and non-wood forest products and services, including across international borders, have a profound effect on sustainable forest management, forest harvesting and the value of forest products.
UNFF stressed the importance of targets and timetables to reflect the progress in implementing the IPF/IFF proposals for action. These targets will be set by individual countries, within the framework of national forest processes and organizations, as appropriate. Concrete process-oriented targets for the POA should be considered with a view to being adopted, if possible, at UNFF-2.
UNFF-1 decided that reporting on implementation would be on a voluntary basis, including by sub-regional and regional groups and processes. The voluntary reporting should include achievements and identify gaps and obstacles to implementation and would start at UNFF-2. Although it is not obligatory, the reports may be prepared in consultation with relevant stakeholders. However the relevant stakeholders themselves are also encouraged to provide reports on their contribution to implementing proposals for action.
At each UNFF session, countries, CPF member organizations and other relevant organizations, and stakeholders are invited to make proposals and commitments for implementation of proposals.
NGO Contributions
A number of NGOs attended the first session of UNFF and drew up a joint position paper entitled Minimum Requirements to Ensure an Effective UN Forum on Forests. Members of the Global Forest Coalition and other NGOs identified an exclusive focus on implementation as their first priority. According to the paper, the debate on implementation needs to involve Major Groups, particularly indigenous peoples, and address the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation.
NGOs also highlighted the need to maintain the connection between the UNFF and the Convention on Biological Diversity as the main legally-binding agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of forests. NGOs wanted to see the Multi-Year Programme of Work shaped by a concise Plan of Action based on concrete targets and timetables for implementation.
UNFF 2
The second session of UNFF will take place in San José (Costa Rica) from 4-15 March 2002.
Contact: Mia Soderlund, Major Groups Focal Point, UNFF Secretariat, 2 UN Plaza, Room DC2-1276, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963 9875, fax +1-212/963 4260, e-mail <soderlund@un.org>, website (www.un.org/esa/sustdev/forests.htm).
BUILD-UP TO 4TH WTO MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE
After the collapse of the Third Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Seattle (USA) in November 1999, WTO Member States have continued negotiations in the earlier agreed built-in agenda, including on trade and agriculture, and trade in services. But with the November 2001 Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference approaching, a flurry of preparatory meetings have been organized both among Member States and with civil society. Here are some of the highlights.
Special TRIPs Council Meeting
At a meeting on 20 June the WTO Council on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) discussed the access of poor countries to medicines under the TRIPs regime. Coming in the wake of an international outcry over the difficulties faced by African countries in particular in gaining access to drugs for HIV/AIDS, the discussion was informed by two reports. One, TRIPs and Public Health (IP/C/W/296), was tabled by the 30-nation Africa Group and 26 other developing countries. The other, Relationships Between the Provisions of the TRIPs Agreement and Access to Medicines (IP/C/W/280), was prepared by the European Union. The meeting was addressed by over 40 delegates, all of whom supported the right of developing countries to use compulsory licensing of patented medicines to cope with health emergencies. In light of Member States’ differing interpretations of rights and obligations in this area, developing countries are seeking official confirmation at the Fourth WTO Ministerial Meeting from 9-13 November in Doha (Qatar) that the TRIPs agreement does not reduce “the range of options available to governments to promote and protect public health, as well as other overarching public policy objectives.”
General Council Meetings on Implementation
At an informal meeting of the WTO General Council (GC) on 21 June, in preparation for the Doha Ministerial Conference, seven developed and developing countries tabled an 11-page proposal dealing with the implementation concerns of developing countries. Implementation has become an important issue for developing countries since it covers on the one hand, the lack of action of industrialized countries in implementing their obligations under the Uruguay Round and on the other, the difficulties faced by developing countries in implementing their obligations, both in terms of the content of some of the agreements and in relation to the timeframes agreed. These issues lie behind the demands of the developing countries for a better balanced multilateral trading regime under the WTO.
The paper, submitted jointly by Argentina, Morocco, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Thailand and Uruguay, covered the demands of developing countries in the areas of anti-dumping, textiles, subsidies and countervailing measures, agriculture, trade-related investment measures, trade-related intellectual property rights, and special and differential treatment. According to observers, until now the industrialized countries have appeared unwilling to move on these demands until developing countries endorse a new round of trade negotiations. While industrialized countries acknowledged the concerns expressed in the paper, some developing countries said that the paper did not go far enough in addressing their concerns.
A special session of the WTO General Council dedicated to implementation issues was held on 20 July. It had before it a paper (JOB (01)/112), which focused on so-called “do-able” implementation issues and was prepared by GC Chair Stuart Harbinson and WTO Director General Mike Moore, based on consultations around the seven-country paper submitted in June. Observers say that lack of progress in the consultations and the meeting led many developing-country WTO Members to voice their frustration at the lack of movement in this area.
A New Round of Trade Negotiations?
On 7-8 July in Geneva, the WTO secretariat organized a symposium for NGOs and interested Member States on issues confronting the world trading system. In his opening remarks, WTO Director-General Mike Moore said that after the Doha Ministerial Conference, “we must leave the WTO stronger and more open, ready to play its full part in international trade relations. To achieve this, I believe we must launch a new round or a wider set of negotiations.” Among the arguments in favour of a new round, Mr. Moore said that cutting barriers to trade in agriculture, manufacturing and services by a third would boost the world economy by US$613 billion, according to one study from Michigan University. “That is the equivalent to adding an economy the size of Canada to the world economy,” he said. “Doing away with all trade barriers would boost the world economy by nearly US$1.9 trillion, or the equivalent of two Chinas.” He also mentioned that agricultural subsidies in countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in dollar terms are two-thirds of Africa’s total GDP. “Abolition of these subsidies would return three times all the Official Development Assistance put together to developing countries. Kofi Annan wants US$10 billion to fight AIDS; that is just 12 days of subsidies in dollar terms,” he said.
In response to the unwillingness of the economically more powerful WTO Members to address meaningfully major North/South imbalances and asymmetries in the world trading system outside a broader negotiating agenda, Mr. Moore said: “Can I be politically incorrect? Just because the great economic powers want something, that does not automatically make it wrong.”
At the symposium, European Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy argued that the best vehicle for assuring that “globalization is harnessed for the benefit of all” is a new round of global trade negotiations. He said such negotiations should, from the European Commission’s point of view, not only encompass market access issues, but also “update and strengthen the WTO rulebook to manage the interface between trade and other policy areas such as health, consumer safety and environment,” and “the extension of WTO rules into new areas, notably investment, competition, and trade facilitation.”
Mr. Lamy acknowledged that investment negotiations in the past had been a highly controversial issue for NGOs and some developing countries, “who were concerned that a wholesale opening of their markets to speculative capital movements could swamp domestic development policies, or give too many rights to companies at the expense of governments.” However, he said the European Commission’s idea now is to “confine negotiations to commitments based on a positive list of sectors, the so-called bottom-up approach, giving all members control over whether and when to allow foreign investment while preserving their right to regulate.” He also argued that the European Union and the United States “could get along” without a new round. “I am less sure about developing countries,” he added, “particularly the poorest. My fear is that without a round, the world trade system will leave them further behind.”
Evaluating Existing Trade Agreements
On the same panel, Dean Hirsch, the President of the international NGO World Vision, argued that before considering the launch of a broader set of negotiations, it was essential to first conduct a comprehensive assessment of the impact of the 1994 Uruguay Round agreements on the poor. He argued that trade is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. Mr. Hirsch said “I believe the end must be sustainable human development that reduces poverty. Trade is good and useful when it serves that end. When it does not, it can be an obstacle to development. Our trade policies and institutions should be evaluated, not in terms of whether they promote more commerce. They should be evaluated on how they serve the goal of promoting development and reducing poverty.”
Mr. Hirsch called for a much more nuanced and historically-informed approach for gauging the benefits of trade liberalization. He noted that the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the United States all developed their domestic industries “behind tariff walls” and with other instruments such as below market-rate loans. More recently, Japan, Taiwan (Province of China) and South Korea used various measures to industrialize, many of which “are now banned under WTO rules or soon could be.” These included high levels of tariff and non-tariff barriers, public ownership of large segments of banking and industry, export subsidies, local content requirements, import-export linkages, patent and copyright infringements, restrictions on capital flows, among others. Would such countries had enjoyed robust economic development, Mr. Hirsch asked, “if more powerful, industrialised nations had forced them to follow current–and proposed–WTO rules?”
Mr. Hirsch also cautioned against claims that trade liberalization provides “net benefits,” when this is done simply by showing in monetary terms that the overall benefits are greater than the costs. “But greater for whom?” Mr. Hirsch asked. “Are the winners rich or poor? Where do they live? In wealthy enclaves or in poor rural areas? Which regions benefit? What are the gender effects? Does the ‘net benefit’ make it harder for poor women to feed their families but easier for the middle class to buy low cost TVs? These are the kinds of vital questions that lurk behind the glib assurances about the ‘net benefits’ of trade reform.”
A “Development Box?”
Among the concrete proposals that emerged from the two-day symposium, was the incorporation of a “development box” in the Agreement on Agriculture. This proposal (G/AG/NG/W/13) had originally been put forward by a group of 11 developing countries (Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Honduras, Kenya, Nicaragua, Pakistan, El Salvador, Sri Lanka, Uganda and Zimbabwe) at the June 2000 WTO Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture. The proposal was based on 14 developing country case studies undertaken by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The studies show that agricultural liberalization in developing countries and implementation of provisions contained in the Agreement on Agriculture are connected with a consistent pattern of increased rural poverty, concentration of farms, marginalization of small farmers and threats to food security. On this basis, the proposal calls for modifying the agreement to exempt developing countries from its disciplines, thus giving them the flexibility required to readjust tariff levels or introduce new subsidies in the interest of protecting small farmers’ livelihoods, providing and sustaining rural employment, and promoting food security.
Common LDC Position
On 24 July, the trade ministers of the 49 least developed countries (LDCs) gathered in Zanzibar (Tanzania) to develop a common position before the Doha Ministerial Conference. They adopted a declaration calling upon the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference to ensure that “in view of the LDCs’ limited capacity to negotiate and undertake further commitments, the scope of the future WTO work programme is manageable and agreed by all members by consensus, and that any future negotiations are based on an agenda accommodating LDCs’ interests.” Among other proposals, the declaration calls for the Doha conference to agree on binding commitments on duty-free and quota-free market access for all products from LDCs “on a secure, long-term and predictable basis with realistic and flexible Rules of Origin to match the industrial capacity of the LDCs.” It also calls for “binding and full implementation of the provisions of Special and Differential treatment, including adoption of new Special and Differential measures to take into account problems encountered by LDCs in implementation.”
In a related text outlining LDCs’ development agenda for the Doha conference, LDC ministers express their position on the “new issues” that the European Commission and others would like included in a new round. On trade and investment they insist that “LDCs are not demandeurs of a multilateral framework in this area,” stressing that the development implications of an multilateral investment agreement “have not been fully discussed nor understood.” On trade and competition policy, LDC ministers insist that deliberations in the WTO Working Group on Trade and Competition Policy should be finalized “prior to any decision whether to formally introduce this issue on any future negotiation agenda.” The same position was expressed with regard to proposals to enter into negotiation on transparency in government procurement, in view of the complexity of the issues and the divergence of views on the matter. As for trade facilitation, LDC ministers stated that “this area does not require new rule making. Existing rules and regulations both within and outside WTO are sufficient but may require improvement and a high degree of implementation,” including increased financial and technical assistance to narrow the technology and human resources gap that exist between LDCs and developed trade partners.
Contact: Bernard Kuiten, External Relations Officer, WTO, Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, Case postale, CH-1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland, telephone +41-22 /739 5676, fax +41-22/739 5777, website (www.wto.org).
SECURITY COUNCIL AND GA DEBATE CONFLICT PREVENTION
The need to make preventive action a key part of the international security system was a central theme in an open debate held by the Security Council on 21 June 2001 in New York. The debate, involving representatives of 30 countries, was on a set of far-reaching measures proposed by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in a report on the prevention of armed conflict (A/55/985-S/2001/574).
The report was later taken up by the General Assembly on 12 July and reflected in the GA resolution (A/RES/55/281) of 1 August which, unlike most GA resolutions, invites civil society actors to consider the report and the recommendations addressed to them.
“If this report has one message, it is that we must intensify our efforts to move from a culture of reaction to one of prevention,” said UN Deputy Secretary-General Louise Fréchette, introducing the report.
During the debate, the then Council President, Abdus Samad Azad, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, said that the effective discharge of the Council’s responsibilities would require the political will and material support of Member States. Jamaica supported the Secretary-General’s intention to provide periodic regional or subregional reports to the Council on threats to international peace and security, and to provide suggestions on how those threats might be addressed.
The United States felt that the “most useful service provided by the Secretary-General’s report” was its clarification of how the various parts of the UN system could improve cooperation and coordination in conflict prevention. The United Kingdom strongly supported the link the report made between conflict prevention and sustainable development.
China said that given the differences among countries, the basic principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity must be supported, but that the UN must play a role in the democratization of inter-State relations to help resolve conflicts early. The Russian Federation supported the Secretary-General’s proposal to look for new forms of interaction between the Council and the General Assembly in conflict prevention as well as periodic formal meetings with a frank exchange of views about “hot spots.”
Mali emphasized the importance of coordination between the UN and other actors, particularly regional organizations like the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which has created a system for monitoring peace and security. Sweden on behalf of the European Union and associated States agreed with Mr. Annan’s proposal that the Council should consider an innovative mechanism for discussion of prevention, as well as the active use of preventive deployments before the onset of conflict.
During the General Assembly debate, held on 12 July, greater emphasis was placed on addressing the multidimensional causes of conflict. Governments also stressed the role of the General Assembly in conflict prevention and the need for cooperation among Member States, the UN system and civil society.
Bangladesh, supported by other countries, identified as core issues the role of the Security Council and its ability to take decisions on the merit of a case; the mustering of political will; the relationship between conflict prevention and sustainable development; investment in conflict prevention; and the shift from a culture of reaction to one of prevention. Singapore proposed a potential division of labour, with the Security Council acting to deal with imminent conflicts, and the General Assembly dealing with structural causes, particularly poverty.
Egypt criticized the report’s limitation of preventive action to those conflicts occurring within States. Egypt felt that many intra-State conflicts had a regional and global dimension and should therefore be addressed. Egypt, supported by many countries, also criticized the report for its failure to address weaponry other than small arms, especially the complete absence in the report of weapons of mass destruction.
Contact: The Report of the Secretary-General is available on the UN website (www.un.org/Depts/dpa/docs/peacemak.htm). For a hard copy, contact NGLS in New York.
Ten Principles For Conflict Prevention
--Conflict prevention is one of the primary obligations of Member States set forth in the UN Charter. UN efforts in this regard must be in conformity with the Charter.
--Primary responsibility for conflict prevention rests with national governments, with civil society playing an important role.
--The means for the peaceful settlement of disputes are an important instrument for conflict prevention, including negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and judicial settlement. Sanctions can have an important deterrent effect.
--Preventive action should be initiated at the earliest stage of a conflict cycle.
--Primary focus of preventive action should be addressing the deep-rooted socio-economic, cultural, environmental, institutional, political and other structural causes underlying conflicts.
--An effective preventive strategy requires a comprehensive approach that encompasses both short- and long-term measures with a strong focus on gender equality and the situation of children.
--Conflict prevention and sustainable and equitable development are mutually reinforcing activities.
--There is a need to introduce conflict prevention into the UN system's development programmes and activities and to increase coherence and coordination in the UN system, with a specific focus on conflict prevention.
--A successful preventive strategy depends upon the cooperation of many UN actors, the Bretton Woods Institutions, Member States, international, regional and sub-regional organizations, the private sector, NGOs, and other civil society actors.
--Effective preventive action by the UN requires sustained political will on the part of Member States.
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2001 FOCUSES ON NEW TECHNOLOGIES
According to the 2001 Human Development Report (HDR), entitled: Making Technologies Work For Human Development, information and communications technology and biotechnology may have the potential to make a major contribution to reducing world poverty.
The annual report, commissioned by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), says that new technologies can make an important development impact because they can overcome social, economic and geographical isolation; increase access to information and education; and enable poor people to participate in decisions affecting their lives. The report argues that investments in technology can equip developing countries with better tools to improve their prospects of meeting key development goals and to become more productive and prosperous. “Technology is a tool, not just a reward, for growth and development,” the report says.
UNDP Administrator Mark Malloch Brown warns that “ignoring technological breakthroughs in medicine, agriculture and information will mean missing opportunities to transform the lives of poor people.” The report says that developing countries may benefit from genetically-modified foods, crops, and other organisms (GMOs), and stresses the need to acknowledge and manage the potential environmental and health risks of GMOs by calling for more research into their long-term impacts and advocating the labelling of genetically modified products. The report also stresses the importance of supporting developing countries’ build-up of regulatory capacity and monitoring mechanisms to manage the potential risks.
The report urges greater public investment in research and development to ensure that new technologies meet the needs of the world’s poor. “We can’t count on the private sector alone to do the job,” says Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, the lead author of the report, “because it responds to the needs of high-income consumers rather than the needs of those who have little purchasing power.” As a result, only 10% of global health research focuses on the illnesses that constitute 90% of the global disease burden. For instance, in 1998 global spending on health research was US$70 billion, but just US$300 million was dedicated to vaccines for HIV/AIDS and about US$100 million to malaria research. According to the report, agriculture and energy research that focuses on the specific needs of developing countries is also being neglected.
Public sector funding for research and development could compensate for this, says the report, but governments in both developing and developed countries have so far failed to provide the support needed. The report therefore calls for new international initiatives and the fair use of global rules to adapt new technologies towards the most urgent needs of the world’s poor. Examples of such initiatives, as mentioned in the report, are new public-private partnerships, dedicated funds for research and development, differential pricing of key technology products in different parts of the world, and the fair use of intellectual property rights.
This year’s HDR introduces the Technology Achievement Index (TAI) as an important parameter for human development. The TAI measures a country’s capacity to create and diffuse technology and to build a human skill base, reflecting the country’s capacity to participate in technological innovation on a world scale.
The Index ranks countries into four categories: leaders, potential leaders, dynamic adopters and marginalized. The leaders, headed by Finland, comprise 18 countries, all members of the OECD except Singapore and Israel. The potential leaders number 19 and start with Spain, Italy and the Czech Republic and end with Romania, Costa Rica and Chile. The 26 dynamic adopters include countries from Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa and the Arab world. The nine marginalized are Ghana, Kenya, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Senegal, Sudan and Tanzania.
UNDP has been publishing the HDR since 1990. Every year it commissions an independent team of experts to explore a particular issue of global concern. As in previous years, the HDR also features a Human Development Index (HDI), which measures average achievement in three basic dimensions of human development–a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living. These three basic dimensions are subdivided into a number of indicators, among which are life expectancy, adult literacy, educational enrolment and income per person. The HDI is updated annually and ranks 162 countries. In most countries the HDI has risen over the past 25 years; in some countries such as Egypt, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea and Portugal this increase has been significant. Norway ranks first in the HDI and Australia second. Both countries moved ahead of Canada, which has been the leader for the previous six years. The United States dropped from the third to the sixth place. The bottom 28 countries on the Index are all in Africa, with Sierra Leone ranking last on the list.
NGOs have criticized HDR 2001 for a perceived over-emphasis on new technologies, for appearing to promote GMOs and for neglecting alternatives such as organic agriculture.
Contact: Trygve Olfarnes, UNDP, 1 UN Plaza, New York, NY 10017, United States, telephone +1-212/906 6606, fax +1-212/906 5364, website (www.undp.org/hdro).
For a copy of the report, contact UN Publications, 2 UN Plaza, Room DC2-853, New York NY 10017, USA, fax +1-212/963 3489, e-mail <publications@un.org> or UN Publications, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, fax +41-22/917 0027, e-mail <unpubli@unog.ch>.
WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY ENDORSES WHO’S STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
After eight days of deliberations the 54th World Health Assembly closed its business in Geneva on 22 May 2001. The biggest event in the annual calendar for the World Health Organization (WHO), the Assembly charts the global course for the Organization and its 191 Member States in dealing with major public health threats.
For the first time in the history of the Organization, the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan addressed the Assembly. In his AIDS-focused speech, Mr. Annan outlined the structure of a multi-billion dollar Global AIDS and Health Fund to fight HIV/AIDS and “other infectious diseases that blight the prospects for many developing countries–starting with TB and malaria.”
In a resolution on the global response to HIV/AIDS, Member States at the Assembly called on WHO Director-General to “take an active part, together with other international actors, in the development and establishment of a global HIV/AIDS and health fund and to maintain close collaboration with the international community and the private sector with the aim of providing the availability of medicines for HIV/AIDS, including antiretroviral therapy.”
The resolution urges Member States to “scale up their responses to HIV/AIDS, with particular emphasis on building up partnerships across sectors.” It also addresses the issue of access to medicines, calling on the international community to “cooperate constructively in strengthening pharmaceutical policies and practices, including those applicable to generic drugs and intellectual property regimes, in order further to promote innovation and development of domestic industries consistent with international law.”
Another important resolution linked to access to drugs concerned WHO medicines strategy. Highlighting the fact that one-third of the human population still lacks access to essential drugs, the resolution urges Member States to promote equitable access to medicines. It requests the WHO Director-General to “stimulate the development of drugs for diseases whose burden lies predominantly in poor countries” and to “enhance efforts to study and report on existing and future health implications of international trade agreements.” It also speaks of the need for “systems for voluntary monitoring drug prices and reporting global drug prices with a view to improving equity in access to essential drugs in health systems.”
A comprehensive resolution on Infant and young child nutrition was adopted, marking the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes. The resolution calls on Member States to “protect, promote and support exclusive breastfeeding for six months as a global public health recommendation, and to provide safe and appropriate complementary foods, with continued breastfeeding for up to two years of age or beyond.” The resolution also addresses the risk of HIV transmission through breastfeeding and called for further independent research in this area.
Member States also called for increased transparency and vigilance over the influence of tobacco transnationals on global tobacco control. “The tobacco industry has operated for years with the expressed intention of subverting the role of governments and of the World Health Organization in implementing public health policies to combat the tobacco epidemic,” said the Assembly in the resolution it adopted on tobacco.
The resolution states that public confidence would be enhanced by transparency of affiliation between delegates to the Health Assembly and other WHO meetings, and the tobacco industry. It urges countries “to be aware of affiliations between the tobacco industry and members of their delegations.” It also calls on WHO to continue to keep Member States informed about the activities of the tobacco industry.
One-third of the world’s population is infected by schistosomes and soil-transmitted helminths with 300 million experiencing a high incidence of disease. These infections are invariably more prevalent in the poorest sections of the least developed countries. Repeated chemotherapy with safe, single-dose affordable drugs at regular intervals keeps the infection at bay. The Assembly adopted a resolution urging Member States to “ensure access to essential drugs against schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminth infections in all health services in endemic areas for the treatment of children, women and other groups at risk of morbidity, with a goal of attaining a minimum target of regular administration of chemotherapy to at least 75% of all school-age children at risk of morbidity by 2010.”
At the beginning of the 21st century, epidemics ranging from cholera and meningitis to ebola and lassa fever continue to pose real health risks to global health security. In the last four years, WHO has verified over 800 outbreaks of international importance. The Assembly adopted a resolution on Global health security: epidemic alert and response, expressing support for collaboration between WHO and all potential technical partners in the area of epidemic alert and response, including the current work on the revision of International Health Regulations. The resolution urges Member States to “participate actively in the verification and validation of surveillance data and information concerning health emergencies of international concern, together with WHO and other technical partners.”
The Assembly adopted a zero-growth regular budget for 2002-2003. The total regular budget remains the same as in the previous biennium at US$ 842.6 million. WHO expects extra-budgetary resources in the biennium 2002-2003 to grow by 25% compared to the current biennium.
Contact: Valery Abramov, Public Information Officer, World Health Organization, 20 avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/791 2543, fax +41-22/791 4858, e-mail <abramovv@who.int>, website (www.who.int).
TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION OF CEDAW
The 25th session of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) took place at the UN headquarters in New York from 2-20 July 2001. During the session the Committee’s 23 expert members reviewed the periodical reports of eight State Parties to the Convention: Andorra, Guinea, Guyana, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Singapore, Sweden and Viet Nam. The Committee also heard from NGOs before considering the reports.
The country reports show that, despite progress in advancing equality between men and women, considerable imbalances still exist in most countries. The Committee was especially concerned that some countries continue to maintain reservations to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. At present, for example, Singapore holds reservations to five Articles of the Convention. During an informal meeting with the Committee, NGOs said that factors that have hampered the advancement of women were the discrepancy between men and women in political participation, large wage gaps between men and women, violence against women, trafficking in women and girls, and prostitution.
The country hearings confirmed many of the concerns. In most countries it is largely men who occupy the senior decision-making posts. There are considerable differences in pay between men and women, and wages are usually lower in female-dominated sectors and the public sector compared to the private sector. Women tend to hold less qualified posts than men, work part-time or in the informal economy. The Netherlands, where the participation of women in the work force has been low, reported having experienced a genuine revolution in the labour market with a rise in the number of women in the workplace. However, there was still a division of work and care between men and women. The number of women in senior positions was low, and most women had small part-time jobs that did not give them economic independence. The Committee said it was surprised by the persistent inequality in Sweden, a country which often serves as a model in terms of women’s participation in political and decision-making processes. There were a few women in decision-making posts, especially in the private sector. According to Sweden, another issue that the Swedish “myth of gender equality” tended to mask was the wage gap between men and women. A country where successful efforts had been made to achieve a “critical mass” of women in all areas of decision making at national and local levels was Guyana, where the number of women parliamentarians had increased by 15% since 1997.
The reports showed that among the greatest challenges to women’s advancement were persistent social and cultural patterns, traditional attitudes towards women, and chronic poverty. In Guinea–where the social indicators of life expectancy, maternal and infant mortality and illiteracy are among the lowest in Africa–the embodiment of the principle of equality between men and women in the country’s constitution had not been enough to change centuries-old customs, such as polygamy, forced marriage and female genital mutilation. The Committee was especially concerned over the many violations of women’s human rights in Guinea, high rate of illiteracy among women and girls, and very low attendance of girls in primary schools. Nicaragua reported that in its society the social phenomenon of “machismo” was present in all areas of daily life. According to Nicaragua, attitudes and values that rendered women subordinate to men were reinforced by the predominant Catholic church. The Committee noted that the difficulties faced by the country–poverty, hunger, the recent emergence from war and Hurricane Mitch–had prevented economic recovery and impeded the improvement of the status of Nicaraguan women. To overcome gender stereotypes and achieve equality between women and men, the Committee pointed out, Nicaragua needed to address several gaps in its legislation, including the incorporation of the concepts of human rights and gender equality in the country’s family code and general education act.
Viet Nam recognized that, despite many accomplishments in employment creation, poverty alleviation, health care and family planning, it still faced many challenges. These included “the feudal ideology of respecting men and looking down on women,” it said. Certain groups in the society still had customs such as wife-kidnapping and early marriage that hampered the development of women’s rights. The Committee was concerned that rural women–up to 80% of Vietnamese women–remained marginalized. The Committee pointed out that rural women often face a seasonal shortage of jobs, poor education, lack of access to information, the burden of outdated traditions and an inappropriate distribution of the workload. Andorra said that its development from a predominantly rural society towards a more service-based one had produced a change in attitudes in the society. Women had gradually been integrated into all areas of political, social and economic life, but considerable gaps, such as the wage gap between men and women, still remained. The Committee was concerned that Andorra’s report seemed to refer to violence as a stereotypical behaviour of Andorran males and wanted to know what measures were taken by the government to prevent violence against women, including domestic violence.
The Committee decided to hold three sessions during 2002. The 26th session of CEDAW is tentatively set for 14 January-11 February 2002 at UN headquarters in New York, when the Committee will review the country reports from Iceland, Portugal, the Russian Federation, Sri Lanka and Uruguay. The second session will be held in July 2002, and on an exceptional basis, a third session will be held in August 2002 to reduce a backlog in reviewing reports of State Parties to the Convention. As of May 2001, 168 Member States are party to the Convention. All Latin American and Caribbean countries have ratified the convention.
Contact: Division for the Advancement of Women, Room DC2-1226, United Nations, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963 3162, fax +1-212/963 3463, e-mail <daw@un.org>, website (www.un.org/womenwatch).
PUBLICATIONS AND ONLINE
Action for Better Cities: Tools and Methodologies for Good Urban Governance
This publication from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) aims to provide tools for effective urban governance. It contains information on several urban governance projects such as their background, objectives and activities, and contacts. The projects include The Urban Governance Initiative (TUGI), Asian Development Bank Benchmarking Project, Asia Pacific Cities Forum, and Local Agenda 21.
Available from: Programme Manager, TUGI, UNDP Malaysia, Wisma UN Block C, Komplek Pejabat Damansara, Jalan Dungun, Damansara Heights, 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, fax +60-3/253 2361, e-mail <tugi@undp.org>, website (www.tugi.apdip.net).
Networking: Directory of African NGOs
This directory provides information on African NGOs involved in development and highlights relationships between the NGOs and their partners within and outside Africa. It aims to increase the effectiveness of grassroots development through information sharing and networking. The entries provide contact information and working language of each group, its source of funding, areas of activity, and objectives. The directory also has a list of networking organizations at the international level.
Available from: UN Publications, 2 UN Plaza, Room DC2-853, New York NY 10017, United States, fax +1-212/963 3489, e-mail <publications@un.org> or UN Publications, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, fax +41-22/917 0027, e-mail <unpubli@unog.ch>, website (www.un.org/pubs/sales.htm).
Global Financial Turmoil and Reform: A United Nations Perspective
This book contains papers and summaries of discussions by UN economists on the Asian financial crisis, and the UN Secretary-General‘s recommendations to the General Assembly on strengthening the capacity of developing and transitional economies to cope with the international financial system.
Available from: United Nations University Press, 53-70 Jingumae 5-chome, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 150-8925, Japan, fax +81-3/3406 7345, e-mail <sales@hq.unu.edu>, website (www.unu.edu).
Regional Seas: A Survival Strategy for Our Oceans and Coasts
This booklet from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) gives an overview of UNEP‘s Regional Seas Programme. Key issues include: ecosystems and biodiversity, living resources, land-based sources of pollution, shipping and sea-based pollution, coastal development, vulnerability of small islands, and marine mammals.
Available from: Division of Environmental Conventions, UNEP, PO Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya, fax +254-2/624300, e-mail <dec@unep.org> or Information Unit for Conventions, UNEP, 15 chemin des Anémones, CH-1292 Châtelaine (Geneva), Switzerland, fax +41-22/797 3464, e-mail <iuc@unep.ch>, website (www.unep.ch/seas).
Africa Partnership
This bi-monthly bulletin, from the International Partnership Against AIDS in Africa (IPAA) of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), contains articles on progress made in efforts against HIV/AIDS in Africa, especially among the five constituents of the partnership: African governments, the UN, donors, communities and the private sector. The bulletin is also available in French.
Available from: IPAA/UNAIDS, 20 avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, e-mail <editoripaa@unaids.org>, website (www.unaids.org).
Earthscan Publications
The Ageing and Development Report: Poverty, Independence and the World‘s Older People
Key themes in this report include community involvement, family life, health and well-being, poverty and exclusion, gender, migration and economic security. It provides case studies and statistics on the condition of older people in the world‘s poorest countries. The report calls for a fundamental shift in policy and opinion on ageing to reflect the real economic and social contributions of older people and to enable them to retain their independence.
The Changing Nature of Work
This book examines causes and effects of the rapid transformation of the world of work. It provides concise summaries of key writings on work and workplace issues, including the often-overlooked social and psychological dimensions.
Available from: Earthscan Publications, 120 Pentonville Road, London N1 9JN, United Kingdom, fax +44-171/278 1142, e-mail <earthinfo@earthscan.co.uk>, website (www.earthscan.co.uk).
The Networker
This magazine, from the UK-based NGO Bond, replaces its earlier publications including Newsletter and Advocates Update. The magazine aims to provide information on international development, articles on strategic issues and a forum for debate, as well as details about Bond activities. The magazine is also available online.
Available from: Bond, Regent‘s Wharf, 8 All Saint‘s Street, London N1 9RL, United Kingdom, fax +44-20/7837 4220, e-mail <bond@bond.org.uk>, website (www.bond.org.uk).
Asia Partnership for Human Development Website
This newly-launched website contains information on the Asia Partnership for Human Development (APHD) and its activities, as well as articles from APHD‘s newsletter Link.
Website (www.aphd.or.th).
Online Halon Trader
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has launched a Business-to-Business web portal to facilitate the international exchange of “banked” halons and reduce the use of newly-produced halons that damage the ozone layer. The portal is designed for companies that use halons in essential applications such as fire protection systems. These companies will be able to post listing of specific demands in the virtual marketplace, and companies or halon banks with recovered, reclaimed or recycled halon will be able to respond with their own listings.
Website (www.halontrader.org).
CALENDAR
DISARMAMENT
-- Preparatory Committee for the Second Review Conference of States Parties to the Convention on Conventional Weapons, 3rd session, 24-28 September, Geneva
-- Fifth Review Conference of States Parties to the Biological Weapons Convention, 19 November-7 December, Geneva
--Third Annual Conference of States Parties to Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Conventional Weapons, 10 December, Geneva
--Second Review Conference of States Parties to the Convention on Conventional Weapons, 12-21 December, Geneva
ECOSOC/GENERAL ASSEMBLY
--General Assembly, 56th session, September-December, New York
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
--World Food Summit–Five Years Later, 5-9 November, Rome
HUMAN RIGHTS
--Working Group on the Declaration of Indigenous Peoples, 15-26 October, Geneva
--Human Rights Committee, 15 October-2 November, Geneva
--Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, 65th session, 14-23 November, Geneva
--Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 27th session, 12-30 November, Geneva
--Committee Against Torture, 27th session, 12-30 November, Geneva
Rights of the Child
--Committee on the Rights of the Child, 28th session, 24 September-12 October, Geneva
INTERNATIONAL LAW
--Preparatory Commission for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, 8th session, 24 September-5 October, New York
NARCOTIC DRUGS
--International Narcotics Control Board, 72nd session, 29 October-15 November, Vienna
REFUGEES
Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
--Meeting with NGOs, 24-26 September, Geneva
--Executive Committee, 52nd session, 1-5 October, Geneva
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
International Labour Organization (ILO)
--World Employment Forum, 1-3 November, Geneva
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Framework Convention on Climate Change
--2nd sessional period (to act as the 7th session of the Conference of the Parties), 29 October-9 November, Marrakech
Global Environment Facility (GEF)
--NGO Consultation, 5 December, Washington DC
--GEF Council Meeting, 6-7 December, Washington DC
TOBACCO
--Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, 3rd session, 22-28 November, Geneva
--UN Ad Hoc Interagency Task Force on Tobacco Control, in conjunction with a Global Consultation on Economic Transition in Tobacco Manufacturing and Agriculture, December, Kobe
TRADE, FINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT
Financing for Development (FFD)
--Preparatory Committee for International Conference on Financing for Development, 3rd session (2nd part), 15-19 October, New York
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank
--Annual meetings of the World Bank Group and IMF, 2-4 October, Washington DC
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
--Trade and Development Board, 48th session, 1-12 October, Geneva
World Trade Organization (WTO)
--Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference, 9-13 November, Doha
GUEST EDITORIAL
Ruud Lubbers
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
Without the help of hundreds of non-governmental organizations, UNHCR would be unable to fulfil its mandate to protect and assist the world’s 21 million refugees and others of concern. From Afghanistan to Zambia, from Timor to Tanzania, from Ecuador to Azerbaijan, NGOs are everywhere that UNHCR operates. They are the ones who turn UNHCR’s plans to protect refugees into reality. In refugee camps in dozens of countries, NGOs distribute food, clothing, blankets and tents. They care for the sick, bandage the wounded, set up field hospitals, dig latrines and drill wells. Elsewhere, they help refugees secure the right to asylum, to find jobs and housing, to place their children in schools, and to integrate into their new societies. Last year, UNHCR worked with 536 NGOs (138 international and 398 national), providing some $208 million for their projects around the world.
Coming from an NGO background myself, I appreciate and respect the vital work that they do. And I want to make their partnership with UNHCR even stronger. That is one reason why, within two weeks of assuming office, I began an ongoing series of meetings with NGOs to share our concerns about our joint global efforts in helping refugees and to explain my vision for UNHCR at the beginning of the 21st century.
I have sought NGO understanding and support for the difficult but necessary changes that took place this year at UNHCR, including worldwide cuts in posts and operations that resulted in an overall budget reduction of about 14%. This was made necessary by a substantial gap the past few years between our approved budget and the actual income provided by our donors.
Like everyone else, UNHCR must live within its means. But that doesn’t mean we intend to accept chronic under-funding of vital programs for refugees. With just ten governments providing more than 90% of UNHCR’s budget, we need to broaden our funding base. This includes more emphasis on the private sector as well as on convincing more governments that it is in their own best interests to take ownership of UNHCR and its work on behalf of refugees.
Because of our close working relationship in the field, these changes at UNHCR have understandably been of major concern for our NGO partners, many of whose operations have been directly affected by our financial situation. Because of its international mandate for refugees, UNHCR will maintain its global coordination role in refugee work. But in future, we also need to look more closely at what NGOs themselves—particularly the international ones—provide in the way of funding and material resources when implementing programs for refugees. Although national NGOs account for about 75% of UNHCR’s implementing partners worldwide, they receive only about 28% of the funding. The rest goes to international NGOs. We would like to see more international NGOs “buying into” the refugee cause—say through increased cost-sharing in specific projects.
Another possibility worth exploring is the outsourcing of specific sectoral activities—for example, shelter, water, sanitation, health—in which governments, with UNHCR coordination, provide direct or bilateral funding to their own national NGOs.
UNHCR has also made clear to NGOs that we do not view them simply as providers of material assistance. I believe some NGOs can play a greater role in specific protection activities as well. We are exploring ways of making this a reality on the ground, including NGO involvement in monitoring and reporting activities and in the provision of secondees for protection work.
For their part, the NGOs have made clear that they expect UNHCR to assume its leadership responsibilities in refugee situations, particularly our coordination function in emergencies. Our record has indeed been spotty in this area and steps have been taken to improve coordination based on lessons learned during, for example, the Kosovo emergency. Many NGOs also complain of “institutional arrogance” at UNHCR in some past operations, an attitude which will not be tolerated.
Another message that has come through loud and clear from the NGOs is their support for UNHCR’s renewed emphasis on protection as our raison d’etre. UNHCR has come under criticism over the past decade from some NGOs and refugee experts who believe the agency’s increasing operational activities have come at the expense of protection. I believe assistance, particularly the provision of life-saving basics like food, shelter, water and sanitation, is part of our protection mandate. But we welcome and encourage greater NGO participation in these activities under UNHCR coordination.
UNHCR’s recently completed review of its “core” activities underscores our commitment to refugee protection as the heart of our work. This is particularly crucial in view of the numerous protection challenges refugees are facing around the world today. Governments continue to tighten asylum policies and to impose a variety of questionable measures aimed at keeping asylum-seekers from their borders. At the same time, some of the very same governments that complain loudest about the numbers of people turning up on their borders refuse to invest in programs that could help people remain in their regions of origin. And the very foundation of international refugee protection—the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees—is coming under unprecedented and unjustified attack for a host of migration-related problems it was never intended to cover in the first place.
UNHCR is extremely concerned about these trends and we encourage NGOs to play a vocal advocacy role to ensure that the international protection regime continues to serve those who need it most.