|
|
First
Meeting of the Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group on Liability and
Redress under the Biosafety Protocol
25-27 May 2005, Montreal,
Canada
|
|
|
|
Earth
Negotiations Bulletin
- ENB |
|
Click
on the above days to view previous ENB Web coverage. |
|
|
Highlights for Thursday, 26
May 2005
|
|
Delegates to the first meeting of
the Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group of Legal
and Technical Experts on Liability and Redress in
the context of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) met
in Plenary throughout the day. Delegates addressed
the annex to the report of the meeting of the
Technical Expert Group containing scenarios, options, approaches and issues
for further consideration.
Above photo L-R: The afternoon dais with Cyrie Shendashonga, Xueman
Wang, Co- Chair René Lefeber, Worku
Damena, and CBD
Executive Secretary Hamdallah Zedan.
|
|
|
|
SCENARIOS, OPTIONS,
APPROACHES, and ISSUES FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION
|
|
COMPONENTS FOR THE DEFINITION OF DAMAGE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BOTSWANA supported retaining the reference to damage to the
environment. Above photo: Julia Ditlhong (Botswana)
|
ALGERIA suggested merging the components on damage to the
environment and on damage to conservation and sustainable use
of biodiversity. Kouri Fateh (Algeria)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EL
SALVADOR suggested including damage to the natural
productivity, structure, functioning and diversity of
ecosystems, as referenced in COP Decision V/6 (Ecosystem
Approach). Above photo: Jorge Ernesto Quezada Diaz
(El Salvador)
|
MALI
emphasized damage to soil and water. Above photo: Bather
Kone (Mali)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GREENPEACE said damage to biodiversity under the CBD means damage to variability, whereas damage to individual species should also be included.
Above photo: Duncan Currie (Greenpeace)
|
The INTERNATIONAL GRAIN TRADE COALITION preferred
reference to damage to conservation and sustainable use of
biodiversity.
Above photo: Thomas C. O Connor (National Grain and
Feed Association) |
|
|
|
|
VALUATION OF DAMAGE TO BIODIVERSITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NORWAY stressed the need for guidance and criteria on valuing damage when complete restoration is
impossible. Above photo L-R: Bente Odlo and Birthe
Ivars (Norway)
|
ECOROPA stressed the need to encompass the full timeframe necessary for restoration.
Above photo: Christine von Weizsacker (ECOROPA)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AUSTRALIA asked that valuation measures be practical and not impose onerous costs on States. Above
photo: Thomas Roth (Australia)
|
The EDMONDS INSTITUTE highlighted cultural variations in valuing damage.
Above photo: Beth Burrows (Edmonds Institute)
|
|
|
|
CHANNELING OF
LIABILITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
INDIA favored fault-based liability. Above photo: Suresh
Chandra (India)
|
|
CUBA
favored primary responsibility of the operator and residual State
liability. Above photo L-R: Lenia Arce and Hector
Conde (Cuba)
|
|
|
FINANCIAL
SECURITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
MOROCCO
recalled the polluter pays principle’s role for responsible
operator behavior. Above photo L-R: Ben Ahmed Chihab and Hassane
Bendahmane (Morocco)
|
On
collective financial arrangements, UGANDA stressed defining the
circumstances under which a fund would take effect. Above photo:
David Hafashimana (Uganda)
|
|
|
|
CHOICE
OF INSTRUMENT:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BRAZIL suggested
that all options be kept on the table for further
consideration. Above photo: Bernardo Velloso
(Brazil)
|
MALAYSIA
opposed New Zealand's suggestion not to have an
instrument. Above photo: Gurdial Singh (Malaysia)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This
service was prepared in cooperation with the CBD Secretariat
|
