|
Third Meeting
of the Conference of the Parties serving as Meeting of the
Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
13-17
March 2006| Curitiba, Brazil
|
Highlights
for Thursday, 16 March 2006
|
|
|
| |
Delegates
to the third Meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety (COP/MOP-3) met on Thursday in working group and contact
group sessions. Working Group I (WG-I) considered draft decisions on
subsidiary bodies and living modified organisms (LMOs) in transit, and adopted its report. Working
Group II (WG-II) considered draft decisions on compliance and the financial
mechanism. A contact group on budget met throughout
the day. A
Friends of the Co-Chairs group met in the evening to continue
consideration of documentation requirements for LMOs for food, feed or
for processing (LMO-FFPs) (Article 18.2(a)).
Above photo: Brazilian farmers opposed retention of the "may
contain" language in Article 18.2(a), while the Brazilian military police
secured the conference grounds.
WORKING GROUP I
|
OTHER
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL ISSUES:
|
|
The
EU and CAMEROON called for deleting an operational paragraph noting
that transit
parties do not assume obligations of the party of export, explaining it
was not consistent with a subsequent invitation of views and
experience on the rights and/or obligations of transit parties.
Above photo: Chair Ivars in discussion with the EU,
Brazil and Japan.
|
|
UGANDA
proposed adding an operational reference to the rights of
transit parties to regulate the transport of LMOs through
their territories.
Above photo: David Hafashimana (Uganda) consulting with
Mary Fosi Mantenkhu (Cameroon)
|
|
WG-I
Chair Ivars established a small Friends of the Chair group to
continue discussions
Above photo L-R: Chair Ivars with Kirsty Galloway
(CBD)
|
WORKING GROUP II
|
FINANCIAL
MECHANISM:
|
On the preamble, COLOMBIA
suggested deleting references to the COP not having provided
guidance to the GEF on the development of the resource
allocation framework (RAF), as there had been no COP meeting
during that period.
Above
photo L-R: Elizabeth Hodson and Ana Maria Hernandez
(Colombia) |
|
SOUTH AFRICA
proposed,
and delegates agreed, to replace language regarding the need to
establish "basic capacity" to implement the Protocol
with "at least base-level of" capacity.
Above
photo: Ben Durham (South Africa)
|
|
The GEF explained
that the RAF originated as a condition set out by donors as part of the 2002 third GEF
replenishment, and agreed upon by the GEF Council in 2005, adding that all CBD
parties are represented in the GEF Council.
Above photo L-R: Paz Valiente and Mario Ramos (GEF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The EU opposed a proposal by
PERU
to consider the establishment of a special fund for biosafety.
Above
photo: Linda Brown (Austria)
|
|
After
informal consultations,
PERU
agreed to delete the paragraph on a special fund for biosafety.
Above
photo: Maria Luisa del Rio Mispireta (Peru) |
|
Above
photo L-R: The WG-II dais with Yibin Xiang (CBD), WG-II Chair Rey
Santos and Erie Tamale (CBD)
|
|
CONTACT GROUPS:
|
|
Above
photo R-L: Ositadinma Anaedu , Chair of the contact group
on budget with Cyrie Shendashonga COP/MOP-3 Secretary. |
|
Above photo: The contact group on Article 18.2(a) met briefly in the
afternoon to hear a report on deliberations in the Friends of
the Co-Chairs group. |
|
Above
photo:
Contact group Co-Chairs François Pythoud (Switzerland) and Luiz Alberto Figueiredo Machado
(Brazil) |
ENB
SNAPSHOTS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Above
photos: Youth delegates reminded members of the Friends of the Co-Chairs group, as they prepared to begin their evening deliberations, that their negotiations of the documentation requirements for LMO-FFPs "contain" their future. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please
e-mail the
Digital Editor if
you have any questions regarding the content of this
page.
| Back to
Linkages home | Visit
IISDnet | Send e-mail to
ENB | © 2006, IISD. All rights reserved. |
|
|