2nd meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on 
Biological Diversity serving as the meeting of the Parties to the 
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety  -  Issue #3 

EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR 
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) <http://www.iisd.org>

Written and edited by:

Leonie Gordon
Stefan Jungcurt 
Pia M. Kohler 
William McPherson, Ph.D. 
Elisa Morgera 
Elsa Tsioumani 

Editor:

Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 

Director of IISD Reporting Services:

Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Vol. 9 No. 318
Thursday, 2 June 2005

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/biodiv/bs-copmop2/ 

COP/MOP-2 HIGHLIGHTS: 

WEDNESDAY, 1 JUNE 2005 

Delegates to the second meeting of the Conference of the Parties 
to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) serving as the 
meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety 
(COP/MOP-2) convened in plenary and two working group sessions. A 
morning plenary considered conference room papers (CRPs) on 
cooperation with other organizations, and liability and redress. 
Working Group I (WG-I) discussed CRPs on: the Biosafety 
Clearing-House (BCH); risk assessment and risk management; 
handling, transport, packaging and identification (HTPI); and 
other scientific and technical issues. Working Group II (WG-II) 
considered CRPs on: notification; capacity building, including the 
roster of experts; and public awareness and participation. A 
contact group discussed documentation for living modified 
organisms for food, feed or processing (LMO-FFPs). 

PLENARY

COP/MOP-2 President Sothinathan Sinna Goundar, Deputy Minister of 
Natural Resources and Environment of Malaysia, opened the meeting 
and noted that the rules of procedure of the Compliance Committee 
will be referred to a Friends of the Chair group including 
participants from all regions and chaired by Jane Bulmer (UK). 
WG-I Chair Birthe Ivars (Norway) and WG-II Chair Orlando Santos 
(Cuba) reported on progress in their respective working groups.

COP/MOP-2 President Goundar then presented a CRP on cooperation 
with other organizations, conventions and initiatives. NEW 
ZEALAND, BRAZIL, ARGENTINA, AUSTRALIA and the US requested more 
time for consideration. The Netherlands, on behalf of the EU and 
BULGARIA, proposed encouraging the development of a memorandum of 
understanding with the Aarhus Convention. BRAZIL, CHINA, AUSTRALIA 
and the US expressed concern about emphasizing a regional 
convention. SWITZERLAND added a reference to the International 
Plant Protection Convention and CHILE to the International Animal 
Health Organization. 

COP/MOP-2 President Goundar presented a CRP on liability and 
redress, which was supported by the EU and COLOMBIA. NEW ZEALAND 
requested time for consideration and, with BRAZIL, AUSTRALIA and 
PERU, called for quoting the exact language of Protocol Article 27 
to note that COP/MOP shall "endeavor to" complete the process 
within four years. COP/MOP-2 President Goundar said plenary will 
consider amended draft decisions on Friday. ARGENTINA drew 
attention to procedures making it difficult for observer 
governments to intervene.

WORKING GROUP I

BIOSAFETY CLEARING-HOUSE: WG-I Chair Ivars introduced a CRP on the 
BCH. On the preamble, EGYPT proposed an amendment to welcome the 
continuing efforts of the GEF to expand its support on capacity 
building. On capacity building to meet the needs of developing 
countries as well as centres of origin, the EU and MEXICO debated 
reference to countries that are centres of origin and, following 
informal consultations, they agreed on text addressing the needs 
of developing countries as well as those of countries with limited 
capacity that are centers of origin and genetic diversity. WG-I 
approved the CRP as amended.

RISK ASSESSMENT AND RISK MANAGEMENT: WG-I Chair Ivars presented a 
CRP on risk assessment and management. The EU said discussion 
forums may be an inadequate means for developing common 
approaches. NEW ZEALAND proposed organizing regional capacity-
building workshops in collaboration with relevant international 
organizations, and COTE D'IVOIRE suggested inviting non-Parties. 
Many delegations requested extending the timeline for submitting 
views, with BRAZIL suggesting basing future discussion on the 
interim national reports rather than on submissions.

IRAN, the BAHAMAS, BELIZE, UGANDA, CAMEROON and SYRIA supported an 
EU proposal to convene an ad hoc technical expert group (AHTEG) on 
risk assessment prior to COP/MOP-3, stressing this does not 
prejudge discussions on establishing a permanent subsidiary body. 
JAPAN asked to examine the AHTEG terms of reference provided by 
the EU, concerned they may influence discussions on a permanent 
subsidiary body. IRAN proposed reference to regionally balanced 
composition of the AHTEG.

Raising concerns about workload, BRAZIL, SENEGAL and ARGENTINA 
opposed convening an AHTEG prior to COP/MOP-3. WG-I Chair Ivars 
established a Friends of the Chair group to resolve outstanding 
issues and report to WG-I on Thursday.

HTPI: Documentation for LMOs destined for contained use or for 
intentional introduction into the environment (Article 18.2(b) and 
(c)): In the morning, WG-I Chair Ivars introduced a CRP on the 
issue. The EU suggested referring to Protocol Article 20.3 
(information available to the BCH) in its entirety. The EU also 
proposed urging Parties and inviting governments to take 
"necessary" rather than "further" measures to ensure compliance 
with Article 18.2(b) and (c). BRAZIL, INDIA and NEW ZEALAND 
requested time to consider the proposed amendments.

In the afternoon, BRAZIL opposed the EU's proposal regarding 
"necessary" measures, and cautioned against requiring Parties to 
implement measures beyond their current capacity. After informal 
consultations, delegates agreed to urge Parties to take necessary 
measures, taking into account their specific capabilities. WG-I 
approved the CRP as amended. 

OTHER SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL ISSUES: WG-I Chair Ivars introduced 
a CRP with elements on: obligations and rights of transit States; 
exchange of information on biosafety research; and exemptions from 
the advance informed agreement (AIA) procedure. On exchange of 
information, the EU proposed deleting a request to ensure that the 
Biosafety Information Resource Centre accommodates information 
requests. The EU and MALAYSIA supported deleting the section on 
exemptions from the AIA procedure. WG-I approved the CRP as 
amended. 

WORKING GROUP II

NOTIFICATION: WG-II Chair Santos presented a revised CRP on 
options for implementing Article 8 (Notification), including 
bracketed language on the rights of a Party of transit. NEW 
ZEALAND, supported by BRAZIL and AUSTRALIA, requested deleting a 
recommendation to Parties to consider elements on notification, 
including enforcement measures, use of language determined by the 
Party of import, and rights of a Party of transit. ARGENTINA noted 
that language on notification regarding transit contradicts the 
AIA procedure, which does not apply to LMOs in transit. Following 
CUBA's proposal, INDIA, KENYA, the EU, SWITZERLAND and others 
favored retaining elements on notification, encompassing the right 
of a Party of transit to regulate transport of LMOs through its 
territory, including requiring notification in writing to its 
competent national authority, as required by its regulations. 
Following informal consultations, delegates agreed to a proposal 
by WG-II Chair Santos to acknowledge that the right of a Party of 
transit may include "communication" in writing rather than 
"notification," to avoid reproducing terms of AIA procedure. The 
CRP was approved as amended.

CAPACITY BUILDING: WG-II Chair Santos presented a CRP on the 
status of capacity-building activities. On measures to address 
capacity-building needs and priorities, ZAMBIA called for 
assistance to conduct independent research. ALGERIA emphasized 
assistance in policy formulation and development of legislation. 
TURKEY suggested specific reference to development and 
implementation of national biosafety frameworks. The GEF proposed 
language on sustainability of capacity building by incorporating 
follow-up actions into national capacity-building plans. 

On the review of the action plan, AUSTRALIA proposed that the 
Executive Secretary prepare a background paper on the basis of 
submissions received not only to describe, but also to measure the 
effectiveness of, progress in implementing the action plan. The EU 
suggested, and delegates agreed, that the paper address progress 
in, and effectiveness of, the action plan's implementation.

On the annexed terms of reference for review of the action plan, 
AUSTRALIA called for an additional information element to 
facilitate the review, addressing the effectiveness of 
capacity-building measures. The EU suggested that an overview of 
progress made in implementing the action plan also address the 
effectiveness of implementation. WG-II approved the CRP as 
amended. WG-II also approved a CRP on the roster of experts with 
minor amendments.

PUBLIC AWARENESS AND PARTICIPATION: WG-II Chair Santos introduced 
a CRP on public awareness and participation. Regarding an 
invitation to Parties to explore and maximize cooperation with the 
Aarhus Convention, BRAZIL, supported by NEW ZEALAND, INDIA, 
AUSTRALIA and ARGENTINA, suggested inviting cooperation through 
the frameworks provided by related national and international 
instruments, in particular the Aarhus Convention. SOUTH AFRICA 
suggested reminding Parties to inform the BCH about public 
awareness programmes. WG-II approved the CRP as amended.

CONTACT GROUP ON DOCUMENTATION FOR LMO-FFPS

The contact group met briefly over lunch to discuss procedural 
issues. Co-Chair Fran�ois Pythoud (Switzerland) called for the 
contact group to focus on the scope of application of "contain" 
and "may contain" language.

In the afternoon, Pythoud introduced a Co-Chairs' text, including 
references stating that documentation accompanying transboundary 
movements of LMO-FFPs either state that the shipment contains 
LMOs, when it is known what LMOs are contained, or state which 
LMOs the shipment may contain, when it is presumed to contain 
LMOs. 

Many delegations opposed the "when it is known" and "when it is 
presumed" language for differentiating the application of 
"contain" and "may contain," arguing that exporters should not be 
allowed to claim that they are unaware of the LMOs in a shipment. 
Delegates also debated the scope of the mandate to develop 
detailed requirements for LMO-FFP documentation, proposing many 
alternative texts. Some stressed that the requirements should be 
flexible and the least restrictive possible, and others that 
requiring full identification of LMOs is not beyond the Protocol.

In the evening, the contact group resumed deliberations based on a 
proposal to clearly state that the shipment contains LMOs, and, 
when the shipment contains a mixture of LMO-FFPs, clearly state 
that the shipment contains LMOs that may include one or more of a 
list of LMOs. Several countries were concerned that, under such a 
proposal, exporters could list all approved LMOs. Delegates then 
discussed several proposed reformulations, and a Friends of the 
Co-Chairs group was established to draft compromise text.

Co-Chair Pythoud presented the group's outcome, which retains two 
bracketed options requesting that documentation clearly state: 
when a shipment contains a mixture of LMO-FFPs, that the shipment 
may contain LMOs and, in this case, specify which LMOs have been 
used to constitute the mixture; or that the shipment may contain 
one or more of the LMOs of the commodity in question that are in 
commercial production in the country of export and are approved in 
the country of import.

Delegates then discussed details of the documentation 
requirements, the adoption of thresholds, the development of 
criteria for sampling and detection techniques, and the inclusion 
of information on cost-benefit analyses in submissions to 
COP/MOP-4 on experience gained with the use of documentation. 
Delegates agreed on ensuring the use of a commercial invoice, or 
an annex to a commercial invoice, or a stand-alone document, or 
other document required or utilized by existing documentation 
systems, or documentation as required by domestic regulatory 
frameworks. Delegates negotiated until midnight.

IN THE CORRIDORS

As the issue of notification and transit State rights was ironed 
out, delegates expect an early conclusion to WG-II's agenda on 
Thursday morning, and a mass migration, in the afternoon, to the 
more contentious discussions of WG-I on risk assessment and, 
needless to say, documentation requirements for LMO-FFPs. 
COP/MOP-2 lawyer-types are also becoming increasingly eager for 
updates on the Compliance Committee's rules of procedure, and 
almost regret that the issue has been taken up in a small, closed 
group. The Friends of the Chair on compliance met briefly on 
Wednesday, in a relaxed atmosphere according to some, and will 
reconvene early Thursday morning to get down to brass tacks.




This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin � <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is 
written and edited by Leonie Gordon, Stefan Jungcurt, Pia M. 
Kohler, William McPherson, Ph.D., Elisa Morgera, and Elsa 
Tsioumani. The Digital Editor is Francis Dejon. The Editor is 
Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and the Director of IISD 
Reporting Services is Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the 
Government of the United States of America (through the Department 
of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and 
Scientific Affairs), the Government of Canada (through CIDA), the 
Swiss Agency for Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the 
United Kingdom (through the Department for International 
Development - DFID), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the 
Government of Germany (through the German Federal Ministry of 
Environment - BMU, and the German Federal Ministry of Development 
Cooperation - BMZ), the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 
the European Commission (DG-ENV), and the Italian Ministry of 
Environment. General Support for the Bulletin during 2005 is 
provided by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the 
Government of Australia, the Austrian Federal Ministry of 
Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, the 
Ministry of Sustainable Development and the Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs of Sweden, the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs of Norway, the Ministry of Environment and the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland, SWAN International, the 
Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global 
Environmental Strategies - IGES), and the Japanese Ministry of 
Economy, Trade and Industry (through the Global Industrial and 
Social Progress Research Institute - GISPRI). Specific funding for 
coverage of this meeting has been provided by the New Zealand 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Funding for translation of 
the Earth Negotiations Bulletin into French has been provided by 
the International Organization of the Francophonie (IOF) and the 
French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Funding for the translation of 
the Earth Negotiations Bulletin into Spanish has been provided by 
the Ministry of Environment of Spain. The opinions expressed in 
the Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do 
not necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other donors. 
Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in 
non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. 
For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide 
reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting 
Services at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, +1-646-536-7556 or 212 East 47th St. 
#21F, New York, NY 10017, USA. The ENB Team at COP/MOP-2 can be 
contacted by e-mail at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.

---
You are currently subscribed to enb as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subscribe to Linkages Update to receive our fortnightly, html-newsletter on 
what's new in the international environment and sustainable development arena: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm
- Archives of Climate-L and Climate-L News are available online at: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/climate-L.htm
- Archives of Water-L and Water-L News are available online at: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/water-L.htm

Reply via email to