Distr.
GENERAL
FCCC/SBI/1997/14/Add.1
11 June 1997
Original: ENGLISH
SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION
Sixth session
Bonn, 28 July - 5 August 1997
Item 10 of the provisional agenda
1. The exercise mandated by the Conference of the Parties (COP)
and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
(SBSTA) has generated some reflection within the secretariat on the
relationship between non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the
Convention process, notably on the principles governing the
participation of NGOs.
Conditions of access
2. Arrangements for the participation of relevant NGOs in the Convention process were first made at the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC I) and were worked out between the United Nations Secretariat and the delegation of the
United States of America, as host, on the basis of paragraphs 2
and 19 of General Assembly resolution 45/212 of 21 December 1990.
Subsequently, the management of arrangements for NGO accreditation
became the responsibility of the ad hoc secretariat of the
INC, which evolved into the Convention secretariat. Similarly, the
responsibility for decisions on the participation of NGOs passed from
the INC to the COP. The subsidiary bodies of the COP have adopted the
practice of granting provisional admission to NGOs, subject to formal
accreditation at the subsequent session of the COP.
GE.97-
3. During the early years, some basic admission criteria were
established. According to these, the secretariat seeks to establish
that organizations to be accredited have activities of relevance to
the Convention and are classed as "not-for-profit" (tax exempt) under
the laws of their country of origin. Prior to COP 1, NGOs were
requested to reconfirm their interest in continuing to participate in
the Convention process; this resulted in the removal of some inactive
names from the list.
4. Nevertheless, the conditions for admitting NGOs remain minimal, consistent
with Article 7.6, which states that " ... Any body or agency, whether national or
international, governmental or non-governmental, which is
qualified in matters covered by the Convention ..." may be admitted
as an observer upon informing the secretariat of its wish to be
represented. One third of the Parties present may bar such admission;
this barrier has yet to be raised.
Constituencies
5. An important tool in the management of NGO participation, also dating back to INC I, has been the recognition of "constituencies" of NGOs. Initially, there were two constituencies: business and industry being one and the environmental NGOs the other. Since then, a third group has gained recognition: local government and municipal authorities.
6. None of these constituencies is monolithic and different
strands of opinion can be discerned within them. Moreover, other
constituencies such as parliamentary associations, labour unions,
faith communities and youth groups, regularly seek to present their
views to Convention bodies and could claim their distinct niche in
consultative arrangements. Thus, it may be considered that the
present processes for bringing the views of NGOs into the Convention
through the channel of constituencies do not always accommodate the
diversity of groupings or of the opinions held.
Practical questions
7. In dealing with the accreditation and participation of NGOs,
and advising Convention bodies and their presiding officers on these
matters, the secretariat has had to deal with a number of situations
to which responses have been improvised but never codified. Some of
the questions which have arisen are:
(a) Whether to accredit separately organizations that are
affiliates of others already accredited, for example, the regional
branches of a global coalition, or trade unions that are linked to a
national umbrella organization - itself affiliated to an
international federation;
(b) Whether to provide for the expression of differing views from
the same constituency, for example, the business and industry
constituency; and
(c) Whether to register individual experts or researchers as
observers in the NGO category.
8. In general, the secretariat's improvised responses have tended
to generosity; the result is an open house with a rather flimsy
structure. It is reasonable to expect that a more systematic approach
to consultation, such as is sought in different ways by the NGOs,
will require a more solid structure.
9. For example, if, as is proposed, the secretariat is to use
constituencies and their coordinators as channels of communication,
for itself and on behalf of the Parties, then the constituencies need
to be identified (see document FCCC/SBI/1997/14, in particular,
paragraphs 17, 19, 26 and 31). This should be done in a manner that
responds to the needs of the Parties for consultation and technical
inputs. The greater the number of constituencies thus recognized, the
greater the work involved in communication with them; this may have
budgetary implications for the secretariat.
Principles
10. Some questions of principle have also been generated by these
reflections, and are outlined below.
11. Should the consultative process aim to incorporate interested
individuals or representative organizations or both? If it is
considered important that organizations be genuinely representative,
should there be a more transparent procedure to ascertain and place
on record the nature of participating NGOs: what are their aims, who
are their members, and by whom are they funded? Such transparency is
the norm in the United Nations system and is often required by
national legislation regulating the incorporation and activities of
NGOs.
12. Also in line with practice in the United Nations
system, should accreditation procedures require NGOs to
declare support for the aims of the Convention, for example, its
objective and principles, as set out in Articles 2 and 3? In national
democratic processes, and even in corporate practice, diverse
participation is encouraged on the assumption that it will
contribute, through debate, to a set of broadly shared
aims.
13. Should a greater effort be made to diversify the geographic sources of contributions by NGOs to the Convention process? This would require funding for participation, as proposed by NGOs themselves. In addition, should Parties with important non-governmental lobbies at work be encouraged to engage in debate with them at the national or regional level, so that the interaction between NGOs and the Convention process might be more representative of the global interests at play? For background to these questions, it may be noted that, of the nearly 240 NGOs currently accredited to participate in the Convention process, 55 per cent have addresses in States members of the European Community, 21 per cent in the USA,
15 per cent in other Annex II Parties and 9 per cent in developing
countries. Only one accredited NGO is located in an Annex I Party
with an economy in transition.
14. If accreditation under Article 4.6 were to be limited to
organizations, should separate arrangements be made for the
attendance of interested individuals such as experts and researchers,
as observers, without the opportunity to take part in the
proceedings? Would a distinction need to be made between an academic
researcher and one from a commercial research
organization?
15. What is the value of the "not-for-profit" criterion when a
legitimate purpose of the business and industry NGOs is to defend and
advance the interests of the enterprises that they represent? Would
the COP consider admitting corporations under Article 7.6, or at
least consulting directly with them, so as to have better access to
their "unfiltered" views? It may be recalled that the original
proposal from New Zealand for a business consultative mechanism
envisaged such direct consultations.
16. These questions, as well as those raised in the preceding paragraphs of this addendum, are not unique to the Convention process and have been addressed elsewhere in the
United Nations system (see, for example, Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
resolution 1196/31 of 25 July 1996). Nevertheless, it is for the
Parties to the Convention to decide with whom they wish to consult
and whether they are satisfied with the present arrangements for
accreditation and consultation or if they would prefer a more
structured approach. Now that the Convention process has matured
further, it may be timely for the Parties to address these important
issues. The secretariat is ready to assist the Parties in doing
so.