EDITORIAL
Although
a European financial strategy analyst has reported that green NGOs are
targeting lending institutions now instead of governments, we believe that
the facts indicate that greens have merely adapted to changing times and
have added banks to their target list in their quest to control and curtail
development projects.
Lending Institutions targeted by Green NGOs Although banks have, for public relations purposes, begun to claim they have environmental concerns, the truth is that they are looking out for profits and their own legal defense amid trying to keep the greens off their financial backs. Perhaps the bottom line for lending shall be a cautionary approach while watching out for the level of protest that development projects seem to generate. We hope common sense prevails so that sustainable development through honest guidelines can continue to benefit people while their environments are safeguarded with science-based oversight authorities. Lending institutes are being careful
that their risks do not include high probability of either liability or
environmental damage. They are hiring experts in both areas to keep their
new investments safe in all ways.š
FAO Committee
on Fisheries
The
23rd Session of the UN's Food & Agriculture Organization's Committee
on Fisheries (COFI) was held February 15-19 in Rome and attended by delegates
and observers from over 80 groups and nations. Advocates of sustainable
use and development of the Oceans' natural resources had hoped COFI would
take this opportunity to establish FAO as the international organization
whose primary focus would be the rational and sustainable management of
the World's marine resources to feed the world's growing human population.
(COFI) holds great potential At issue is the competition between
the FAO and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), for oversight of ocean and fisheries issues.
Vesting this authority in FAO was recommended by the Ad Hoc group that
met in Cape Town, South Africa in late 1998. Observers and emerging nations
fear an involvement by CITES will have potentially grave consequences particularly
for those working to avert hunger and promote a balance between resource
conservation and sustainable development.š
Fishery Resource Regulations
under FAO
International
Action Plans dealing with reducing seabird by-catch in Longline Fisheries;
the conservation of Shark populations; and management of global fishing
capacity were among key elements raising from the COFI agenda.
may become more "Green" Eco-labeling and the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries were also high on the COFI priority list. The FAO Code of Conduct has strong support but is considered poorly implemented by member nations. From the "Green" language evident in the reports issued from the COFI meetings, the presence of environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund and other was readily apparent. Eco-labeling was a hotly debated
issue. The United States argued for a uniform, privately developed code
under the International Standards Organization (ISO). Others opted for
UN control, again to assure unity. Some feared eco-labeling would be used
to cripple trade in fisheries products.š
Conservation Victory
against Anti-Use Lobbying
The
CITES Standing Committee, during its 41st meeting held in Geneva
from 8 to 12 February 1999, has agreed that all of the conditions set forth
in Decision 10.1 of the Conference of the Parties have been met, as far
as Namibia, Japan and Zimbabwe are concerned. With regard to Botswana,
a further verification by the Secretariat has been requested. Consequently,
from 18 March 1999, Namibia and Zimbabwe, and most probably Botswana, will
be authorized to export to Japan 13.8 tons, 20 tons and 25.3 tons, respectively,
of stockpiled raw ivory originating from these countries.
This historical decision was taken
by consensus despite intensive lobbying by protest groups such as Species
Survival Network (SSN), International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), Humane
Society of the United States (HSUS) and WWF which prepared a lengthy report
against the re-opening of the ivory trade. This experimental trade should
demonstrate that it is possible to resume a limited trade in ivory under
CITES controls, and that CITES is an efficient treaty.š
CITES and UNEP
In
the 11/98 edition of its Conservation Tribune, IWMC World Conservation
Trust was asking itself about the meaning of the CITES new letterhead,
in fact that of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
We were obviously not the only ones to wonder whether this was an attempt, amongst others, by UNEP to increase its control on CITES, although it is recognized that CITES is in no way a UN Convention. The Standing Committee, at its 41st session, has considered the issue, and it was agreed that the CITES Secretariat would use again its usual letterhead, except for its correspondence with UNEP. The issue should however be reexamined
at the 42nd meeting of the Committee. An issue worth following.š
CITES National
Legislations
In
accordance with Decisions of the Conference of the Parties 10.18 and 10.64,
five Parties to CITES, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Guyana,
Indonesia and Senegal, were under the threat of a recommendation to all
Parties to refuse any import from, and export and re-export to them of
CITES specimens. The Standing Committee, which had to take the decision
at its 41st meeting, agreed that the new legislation submitted
by Indonesia to the Secretariat, just before the meeting, was satisfactory.
Regarding the other four countries, it recognized that significant efforts
had been made but gave them up to next September, i.e. before the 42nd
meeting (24 September), to demonstrate further progress. Thus, no recommended
sanctions have been adopted by the Standing Committee. IWMC wishes to congratulate
these countries, Indonesia in particular.š
CITES COP11 Venue
confirmed
During
its recent meeting in Geneva, the CITES Standing Committee has confirmed
the venue of the COP11 and endorsed the decision taken by the Executive
Director of UNEP to host the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties
to CITES at UNEP Headquarters (Gigiri) in Nairobi, from 10 to 20 April
2000. Questions about logistical and security problems as well as the high
cost involved for participants were raised by several Parties and NGOs
(including IWMC).
However, the UNEP representative at the Standing Committee, the Chairman of the Standing Committee and the Secretariat have made it clear that all major difficulties, such as size and required number of meeting rooms, would be resolved in time for the opening of COP11. The former Deputy Executive Director of UNEP, and now Interim Secretary General of CITES stated that "it was UNEP's intentions to make COP11 the best ever meeting of CITES". We hope that he is right and that
those, like IWMC who have questioned the validity of the Nairobi venue
for the COP11, were wrong. š
Congratulations Mr.
Secretary General of CITES
IWMC
would like to express its most sincere congratulations to Mr. Willem Wijnstekers
for his recent appointment as Secretary General of CITES. IWMC is pleased
to offer its full support to the new Secretary General of CITES in the
fulfillment of the objectives of the Convention.
Mr. Wijnstekers has quite an extensive experience with CITES issues and, according to the IWMC's President, "he has all the ingredients needed to be a successful Secretary General. He should, however, try to avoid that his mandate terminates the same way his two previous predecessors did". Mr. Wijnstekers will start office
on 2 April 1999.š
General Information
|
