As it has been the case for a few years, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), were provided with a special one-hour session allowing them to make a short presentation to the SC members present. This practice was instituted in 1993, by the then New Zealander Chairman of the SC, Murray Hosking, under the pressure of extremist NGOs such as those that joined to create the Species Survival Network (SSN). IWMC, despite its opposition to this practice, has always taken part into these sessions, mainly for the purpose of providing balanced information to the participants.

At the beginning of the NGOs' special session, the Chairman, announced that the SC decided, earlier that day, to allow for full participation of the NGOs in its future meetings, starting with its next meeting. This is rather shocking, as IWMC always claimed that the SC should be protected as a forum in which governments can talk among themselves without the -more than often negative- presence of NGOs.

The participants met by IWMC after the meeting confirmed that the issue of participation of NGOs also came as a surprise to them. No document -as usually required- was prepared by either a Party, any member of the Committee or the Secretariat on this issue. No prior consultation took place between members of various regions and between regional representatives and countries in their respective region. The suggestion that caused a major stir was thrown out by the Chairman, at the very last minute. Later on, IWMC learned that the SC decided, towards the end of its meeting, to revise that position at its next meeting and, to possibly recommend to the Conference of the Parties to amend the resolution dealing with the SC and its terms of reference (which would be the only proper way to act).

But the saga continues. By visiting the CITES Secretariat Web site www.cites.org, readers can find the following sentence, in the press release issued by the Secretariat on the results of the SC meeting:

"The 12-15 March Standing Committee also decided to ensure more transparency in its procedures by permitting the participation in its deliberations of non-governmental organizations (NGOs)."

What is going on? Is everyone confused, or are certain major components of CITES innocent (or not so) victims of some machiavellian manipulation allowing the NGOs to put their grab on the last CITES institution which has, so far, escaped their control. The Parties to CITES need to be fully aware of the situation and of the implications resulting from such a decision.