Distr. GENERAL
CONVENTION ON
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
UNEP/CBD/COP/3/27
16 September 1996
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
[ADVANCE COPY]
CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
Third meeting
Buenos Aires, Argentina
4 to 15 November 1996
Item 17.1 of the provisional agenda
ELABORATION OF A PROTOCOL ON BIOSAFETY
Progress Report
1. By its decision II/5, the Conference of the Parties
established an Open-ended Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on Biosafety.
At the invitation of the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark,
the first meeting of the Working Group was held in Aarhus, Denmark,
from 22 to 26 July 1996.
2. The meeting was attended by representatives of
91 States and of one regional economic integration organisation,
as well as by a number of United Nations bodies and specialised
agencies, intergovernmental organisations, non-governmental organisations
and representatives of the private sector.
3. The meeting elected Mr. Veit Koester (Denmark)
as Chairperson. Mr. Diego Malpede (Argentina), Mr. Berhan Gebre
Egziabher Tewolde (Ethiopia), Mr. Ervin Balazs (Hungary), Ms.
Sandra M.E. Wint (Jamaica), Mr. Gil Sou Shin (Korea), Mr. Sateeaved
Seebaluck (Mauritius), Mr. David Gamble (New Zealand), and
Mr. Antonio La Vina (Philippines) were elected Vice-Chairpersons,
and Mr. Alexander Golikov (Russian Federation) was elected Rapporteur.
4. The report of the meeting is contained in document
UNEP/CBD/BSWG/1/4.
5. The meeting recommended to the Conference of the parties that:
(a) a ten-member Bureau should be established and
the decision as to whether this Bureau be of a permanent nature
should be left to the Conference of the Parties (UNEP/CBD/BSWG/1/4,
paragraph 113);
(b) the Working Group hold two meetings in 1997,
both of five days' duration, with the provisional dates being
12-16 May and 1317 October (UNEP/CBD/BSWG/1/4,
paragraph 114).
6. The meeting agreed the following with respect
to the future work of the Working Group:
"the basic document for consideration at the
first meeting in 1997 should be one containing the views of Governments
and the European Community on the contents of the future protocol.
In that connection, it was decided that, taking into account the
discussions at the current meeting, Governments should submit
their views to the Secretariat no later than 31 December
1996. In doing so, Governments should address the issues in a
succinct way and, if necessary, expand on their position in a
separate document clearly indicating to which items of the annex
their views related. Views not related to any of the items included
in the annex should be specifically identified. The Secretariat
should compile the views submitted, arranging them according to
the annex elaborated at the current meeting. The document
should be finalised and distributed to Governments by early March 1997"
(UNEP/CBD/BSWG/1/4, paragraph 108).
7. The meeting also agreed that the Secretariat should
compile a background document on existing international agreements
consisting of:
"(a) Any inputs received from Governments assessing
the implications for the Open-ended Ad Hoc Working Group's work
in identifying gaps in the existing international legal framework
arising from international agreements which those Governments
consider relevant;
(b) An overview of similar procedures in existing
legal instruments to assist in the development of a AIA/notification
procedure in a Protocol.
(c) Responses from the secretariats of the international
agreements identified in the Report of the Panel of Experts on
Biosafety which met in Cairo in May 1995 (see Annex II
to Annex IV of document UNEP/CBD/COP/2/7) to the following questions
which the Secretariat could put to the other secretariats concerned:
(i) What is the objective of the international agreement?
(ii) To what extent, if any, does the international
agreement cover LMOs resulting from modern biotechnology?
(iii) Is the international agreement currently being applied, or could it be applied, to the oversight of LMOs resulting from modern biotechnology that may have an adverse effect on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
(iv) What obligations or disciplines contained in
the international agreement could be assessed as being relevant
to the Terms of Reference for the Biosafety Protocol negotiations?
(v) Is the international agreement currently being
revised/renegotiated, or when will the next revision/renegotiation
be undertaken? What is the expected timing for completing such
revisions/renegotiations? Is it expected that the next revised
text of the international agreement will address the impact of
LMOs resulting from modern biotechnology on the conservation and
sustainable use of biological diversity?" (UNEP/CBD/BSWG/1/4,
paragraph 109).
8. The meeting also requested the Secretariat to
compile a bibliography of relevant literature regarding both positive
and negative potential socio-economic effects of biotechnology
(UNEP/CBD/BSWG/1/4, paragraph 111).
9. The meeting further decided that the Secretariat
compile definitions already contained in binding international
agreements of the terms proposed for definition in the protocol.
This compilation should indicate the legal source of the definitions
it includes and should be distributed to Governments by 1 October
1996. Governments may then submit to the Secretariat, by 1 January
1997, additional definitions of these terms contained in national
or regional legislation, which shall also be made available for
the consideration of the second meeting of the Open-ended Ad Hoc
Working Group (UNEP/CBD/BSWG/1/4, paragraph 112).
10. The Conference of the Parties may wish to take these decisions into consideration when considering the proposed budget of the Trust Fund for the Convention on Biological Diversity for 1997-1998.