ENB @ WSSD PrepCom-III (New York, March-April 2002)

Version française: Bulletin des Négociations de la Terre

ENB daily reports	HTML	PDF	TXT
SUMMARY
5 April
4 April
3 April
2 April
1 April
28 March
27 March
26 March
25 March

Daily Web Coverage (Images and RealAudio)
Monday 25	Monday 1
Tuesday 26	Tuesday 2
Wednesday 27	Wednesday 3
Thursday 28	Thursday 4
(Fri 29: holiday)	Friday 5 ->

The World Summit on Sustainable Development
Third Preparatory Committee (WSSD PrepCom-III)

UN Headquarters, New York | 25 March - 5 April 2002

E N B
S U M M A R Y

HTML

PDF

TXT

Friday, 5 April

Delegates met in Working Group II to discuss globalization in the morning and met in informal informals on oceans and energy throughout the morning and afternoon. Group II met again in the evening after the final Plenary to conclude discussions on globalization and Africa. The closing Plenary session was held in the afternoon, during which delegates voted to take no action regarding the accreditation of the Tibet Justice Center. Delegates requested that the Chair prepare a new text, to be negotiated in Bali, in advance of PrepCom-IV. Photo: Joanne DiSano, Director, Division for Sustainable Development, DESA, and PrepCom Chair Emil Salim.

Our coverage of side-events: ENB on the side

Working Group II: Sustainable Development in a Globalizing World

Kyrgyzstan called for reference to countries with economies in transition in the chapeau.

Norway stressed the need for mentioning social protection policies and environmental legislation at the national and other levels.

Richard Ballhorn (Canada) and Ihab Gamaleldin (Egypt)

Venezuela for G-77/China said that it was not useful to try to define globalization. He stated that references to the WTO and Doha should be moved to the chapter on trade. He said the text was biased towards the commercial aspects of globalization, and said that globalization was in fact a much broader phenomenon.

He later expressed his aversion to introductory paragraphs and chapeaus, saying that they unnecessarily weighed down the text.

Regarding a paragraph referencing macroeconomic policy, the European Community, on behalf of the EU, called for including good governance, building institutional and administrative capacity, as well as ensuring that economic and structural changes are accompanied by effective policies for social protection, such as retraining and having adequate safety nets.

The US called for a strong and positive message on globalization, describing it as a powerful and positive force that can make sustainable development possible.

On coherence among the UN, WTO and international institutions, the G-77/China said the concerns of developing countries must be taken into account and opposed language stating that appropriate policy responses at the international level are essential to complement and support action at the national level.

Delegates from New Zealand, Australia and the G-77/China during the informal informals on oceans

Informal informals on Oceans

The informal informals on oceans were facilitated by Guy O'Brien (Australia).

Among the points of contention was a divergence on text on sustainable fisheries for food security and sustainable livelihoods. Some suggested making the distinction between sustainable fisheries management and management of living marine resources.

Energy informal informals

The energy group, facilitated by Gusavo Ainchil (Argentina) met throughout the day

Gustavo Ainchil (right) speaks with members of the DESA Secretariat

Plenary:
Accreditation of the Tibet Justice Center

The US said the Tibet Justice Centre (TJC) could contribute to WSSD and its work on women, children and environmental issues.

In response, China opposed the EU proposal to vote on accreditation, and moved to take no action on the proposal and to first hold a recorded vote immediately pursuant to the rules of procedure. He said allowing them to participate would only encourage their separatist activities.

Pakistan supported China in its motion, and said that TJC was involved in political activities that have no relevance to the WSSD, and that accrediting them would politicize the WSSD process.

The US opposed China's motion of no-action. He said that their analysis reveals that the TJC seeks to discuss the issues of self-determination, as allowed by the UN. He said that China was seeking to stifle a legitimate debate.

Spain for the EU, supporting the US, said that the Chinese motion sought to avoid open discussion. He reminded participants that a vote on the motion of no action was not a vote on accreditation, it was merely a vote on the merit of debating the question.

After the vote, Chair Salim announced the results: 107 for, 45 against, with 16 abstentions (see image immediately below). The motion of no action was carried, and the TJC will not be accredited.

The dais during closing Plenary

Chair Salim before the start of the Plenary

Spain, on behalf of the EU and other countries, said that although they support broad participation of all NGOs, it does not mean they agree with the views of all NGOs. He expressed support for a broad range of opinions and views expressed openly and freely in Johannesburg. He requested a vote on the issue of the TJC's accreditation.

Also supporting China, Cuba said the activities of the TJC are in violation of the UN Charter. He expressed surprise at the call to accredit an organization that doesn't seek the development of a country, but instead its disintegration.

Chair Salim with Rod Holesgrove, DESA, and Antonio de Barros, Secretariat, discuss how to proceed in the afternoon Plenary

Andrey Vasiliev, DESA, with JoAnne DiSano and Chair Salim

The Plenary hall was packed for the Tibet vote

Nitin Desai, Secretary-General for the WSSD, speaks with delegates

Closing Plenary

Co-Chair Maria Viotti reported on the completed work of WG-I.

Co-Chair Richard Ballhorn reported on WG-II, which would be meeting immediately after the Plenary to finish its work on globalization and Africa.

Co-Chair Lars-Goran Engfeldt reported on the completed work of WG-III.

The G-77/China proposed that the Chair prepare a text aimed at negotiations, and opposed another compilation text. He said the document should be action-oriented, concise and prepared as soon as possible. He said the Group would be prepared to have an intersessional meeting.

The US thanked the Chair and the Secretariat for the space - both physical and mental - that their hard work created for the delegates. He noted the important work achieved on not only text but also on partnerships.

Norway said the challenge was to find consensus language that does not dilute commitments. He said that in order for the plan of action to be meaningful, it must not describe old challenges that can be found in many other documents. He stated that partnerships should be new and not simply a repackaging of work that is already being done.

R. Sonia Leonce-Carrly, St. Lucia, said that Type 1 outcomes should be multilateral in nature, and that the Chairman's new text should not give the option of renegotiating Agenda 21. She expressed appreciation for the opportunity presented by the extra three days that have been added to PrepCom-IV, she said that this placed an unfair financial burden on small delegations. She also feared the dangerous precedent created by taking negotiations out of New York.

Hungary highlighted the important contributions made by stakeholders at PrepCom-III. He said that the group needed to admit its failure in completing its work on the text as outlined in the GA resolution, and further described it as being too long, not action-oriented, a repetition of ideas, and at times lacking in substance. He said this shortcoming was "our common responsibility." In the drafting of the new text, he called for the enhanced dialogue with all stakeholders to guarantee a common consensus paper: "it cannot be simply be the responsibility of the Bureau or governments".

The dais during closing Plenary

Jan Kara (Czech Republic) reported on the results of the partnerships group, and outlined observations on the scope and modalities of Type 2 outcomes, potential areas for Type 2 partnerships and future plans. He said consultations will continue throughout the Bali meeting and stakeholders will have the opportunity to suggest and discuss partnerships during the multistakeholder dialogue segment and in side events. He said all those interested are invited to submit proposals to the Secretariat and proposals will be posted to the official WSSD website.

Chair Salim reiterated that the PrepCom was mandated to agree on recommendations for further actions at the second substantive PrepCom, and noted that sufficient time must be provided for consultations in order to forge consensus on the document. He said the idea of an intersessional had been explored but that the convening of such a meeting would be difficult. He said that informal-informal consultations would take place just before PrepCom IV from 24-26 May in Bali. May 24 would be for consultations within the groups and the other 2 days would be for informal consultations to facilitate discussions on the document.

Zehra Aydan, DESA, with Nitin Desai

In his closing statement, PrepCom Chair Emil Salim announced that informal-informals on possible elements of a political declaration would be undertaken by Bureau Vice-Chairs Ballhorn and Gamaleldin, and encouraged delegations to submit their views in the intersessional period. He thanked all for the trust they put in his ability to draft a new text, and said that he would need the help of all delegations to complete the task. He said that the reason why he was willing to accept the challenge was that, at the back of his mind, he had the images of the faces of the world's poor who had written to him with the request that WSSD be more than just a conference of words and declarations.

Miscellaneous Photos

John Ashe, Antigua and Barbuda, Joanne DiSano, Director, Division for Sustainable Development, and Lowell Flanders, Division for Sustainable Development

Kevin Stairs and Lasse Gustavsson Greenpeace International speak with Bakary Kante, UNEP

Delegates from Yemen and Vietnam

Jean-Maxime Murat, Haiti (right)

Andrey Vasiliev and Joanne DiSano, DESA, with Chair Emil Salim

Tahar Hadj-Sadok, UNFCCC Secretariat, speaking with Desai

ENB writers Wagaki Mwangi, Angela Churie and Andrey Vavilov with Tijan Jallow, Former Deputy Director UNDP/UNSO (second from left)

ENB writers Wagaki Mwangi, Angela Churie and Andrey Vavilov speak with PrepCom Vice-Chair Ositadinma Anaedu.

Stairs, Gustavsson and Kante

Pam Chasek and Angela Churie, Earth Negotiations Bulletin, speak with PrepCom Chair Emil Salim

Interviewing a South African delegate

Delegates from Burundi and Burkina Faso

Links

> Side-events: ENB on the side (in collaboration with UNDP)
> Version française: Bulletin des Négociations de la Terre

> Official website for PrepCom-III - includes links to Chairman's Paper (basis of negotiations),
provisional agenda, proposed programme of work, and all other documents for the meeting.
> Official WSSD website
> South African WSSD website

> ENB's coverage of PrepCom-II
> ENB's coverage of the Regional Preparatory Meetings and of Prepcom I
> Linkages Introduction to the Johannesburg Summit 2002 - the essential CSD primer to the
Summit.
> Linkage's Portal to the Johannesburg Summit 2002 - access coverage of all WSSD Regional
Preparatory meetings; Who's Who at WSSD; Publications; Calendar of Events; Preparations
and other online resources.