On Thursday morning, the Intergovernmental Committee for the Nagoya Protocol considered draft recommendations on awareness raising and on compliance. On compliance, delegates discussed whether views on elements and options for compliance procedures and mechanisms under the Nagoya Protocol should take into account the lessons learned from: other multilateral treaties or only other multilateral “environmental” agreements; and the Cartagena Protocol and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture in particular. Delegates then held protracted discussions on possible next steps on compliance procedures and mechanisms, including convening: an expert group; a regionally balanced Friends of the Co-Chairs group; or a small group of experts and representatives selected by the regions.

In the afternoon, delegates considered a revised recommendation on the modalities of operation of the ABS clearinghouse, debating whether to address, and if so whether in the pilot phase or at INCP 2, the unresolved issues identified by the April 2011 expert group on the clearinghouse: notification of permits or their equivalents, updating internationally recognized certificates of compliance, third party transfer, tracking the utilization of genetic resources, identification of subject matter or genetic resources covered by the certificate, and confidential information.

In the evening, the Committee took up a revised recommendation on measures to assist capacity building and capacity development.