Preparatory Commission for Marine Biodiversity Treaty Revisits Matters concerning Subsidiary Bodies, Financing
As the commission tasked with preparing for the entry into force of a high-seas biodiversity treaty continued its second session today, delegates from small island developing States issued a strong call that their countries be equitably represented, including through a dedicated seat in the treaty’s Scientific and Technical Body.
The gathering — the second of three sessions of the body formally known as the "Preparatory Commission for the Entry into Force of the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction and the Convening of the First Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Agreement" — is taking place at UN Headquarters from 18 to 29 August. (Coverage to date is available here.)
Delegates Consider Draft Model for Scientific and Technical Body
Article 49 of the Agreement establishes a Scientific and Technical Body to aid implementation. Today, delegates considered a draft model of the terms of reference and modalities for that Body’s operation — prepared by the Commission’s Co-Chairs — as part of a larger consideration of the terms of reference, modalities and rules of procedure for the treaty’s subsidiary bodies.
This morning, "I turned to the dictionary", said Palau’s delegate, who spoke for the Alliance of Small Island States, to confirm the difference between "equity" and "equality". The Alliance’s understanding of equitable geographic representation on the Scientific and Technical Body includes a dedicated seat for small island developing States. As that Body will make critical decisions regarding ocean governance that will impact small island developing States, it is "really unacceptable" for those States not to have direct representation on it, she stressed.
"The UN regional grouping system has not always adequately served to ensure [small island developing States’] representation in crucial matters," she added. The explicit references to the special circumstances of those States — particularly in the Agreement’s provisions enumerating the principles that should guide Parties thereto — "create not merely aspirational language, but a legal foundation", she said. This legal obligation reflects a practical necessity for expertise and "cannot be adequately represented by proxy", she stressed, adding that a "grand vacation" in Palau or Antigua and Barbuda does not make one an expert on small island developing States.
Trinidad and Tobago’s representative, speaking for the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), added that the section on the capacity of members "should include a reference to the use of relevant traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, along with best available science and scientific information". He expressed a preference for a 27-member body, with 5 members from each of the UN regional groups, 1 specially reserved seat for a representative from small island developing States and 1 specially reserved seat for a representative from Indigenous Peoples and local communities with traditional-knowledge expertise.
The representative of the Seychelles, speaking for the African Group, stressed that members should serve in their personal capacity and act impartially. She, too, highlighted the need for regional balance and equitable regional representation. The experts must be selected on the basis of "demonstrated competence and relevant qualifications", she said, and the selection process should include dedicated seats to ensure representation of least developed countries. She also expressed her group’s preference for a detailed, non-exhaustive list of eligibility criteria, with a view to adding additional competencies as necessary to adapt to the evolving needs of the Agreement.
The representative of the Federated States of Micronesia, speaking for Pacific small island developing States, echoed the need for flexibility, adding: "The one thing that we want to avoid is a definitive list that hurts us later." On additional members, he voiced support for having one from small island developing States and one from least developed countries — "and limiting it to that", because "when a lot of big countries have an interest, then we tend to lose out". Similarly, he expressed support for nominating members from Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
Delegates also discussed the scope and functions of the Body as identified in the Co-Chairs’ draft model, diverging over how much of the Agreement should be reproduced in the Body’s terms of reference. Palau’s delegate, speaking for the Alliance of Small Island States, said that the section on functions should retain its explicit reference to article 7(m) of the Agreement, which recognizes the special circumstances of small island developing States and least developed countries. This is especially crucial in the absence of a guaranteed seat for small island developing States on the Body. Further, she said, the sentence regarding the Scientific and Technical Body using the best available science should also include a reference to relevant traditional knowledge.
The representative of Colombia, speaking for the Core Latin American Group, emphasized that the Scientific and Technical Body’s unique and cross-cutting function requires full reference to articles 5, 6 and 7 of the Agreement. While some delegations cited specific provisions in article 7, she stressed that the Body’s work must be grounded in all of the general principles outlined in the Agreement.
The representative of Iceland, noting that article 7 lists the principles and approaches that guide the entire implementation of the Agreement, expressed support for including this article in its entirety — without any "partitioning" —in the Body’s terms of reference. However, he noted, other delegations have requested the inclusion of other articles and "we are worried that we are going down the rabbit hole of reproducing the text of the Agreement in the terms of reference". This is not useful or necessary, he pointed out, especially since there is a section in the draft terms of reference specifically outlining their relationship with the Agreement.
Delegates also considered the rules of procedure that will govern meetings of the Agreement’s subsidiary bodies. The representative of the Seychelles, speaking for the African Group, said that the rules of procedure for the Conference of the Parties should apply mutatis mutandis to the Scientific and Technical Body — "with the caveat that, in case of divergences, the [Conference’s] rules of procedure shall prevail".
The representative of the European Union, speaking in its capacity as observer, agreed that the rules of procedure for the Conference of the Parties will apply mutatis mutandis. Nevertheless, the representative of Trinidad and Tobago, speaking for CARICOM, said that the Scientific and Technical Body would need its own explicit rules of procedure, even as they incorporate relevant Conference rules and make any necessary adjustments.
For her part, the Russian Federation’s representative emphasized that — given the Scientific and Technical Body’s important function — "there is an absolute need" to specify that every State Party to the Agreement is a member of this Body. She also underlined the need to stipulate that all its work be "done by consensus". Iran’s delegate also said that the technical nature of the Scientific and Technical Body requires that its work be done "by consensus".
Commission Also Takes Up Draft concerning Financing
In the afternoon, the Preparatory Commission considered the operationalization of the Agreement’s provisions relating to financing — specifically, those governing the voluntary trust fund to facilitate wide participation in the meetings of bodies established under the Agreement and the "special fund" that will be used to finance various treaty activities. In doing so, delegates offered feedback on a document created by the Co-Chairs containing possible elements of a process to operationalize the special fund.
Nigeria’s representative, speaking for the African Group, said that effective implementation of the Agreement depends largely on adequate and sustainable funding; therefore, early operationalization of the special fund is crucial. He highlighted the element in the Co-Chairs’ document concerning full recognition of the special circumstances of small island developing States and least developed countries, expressing support for the inclusion of language that also recognizes the needs of developing State Parties. This would include geographically disadvantaged States, such as small island developing States, coastal African States, archipelagic States and middle-income developing countries.
Similarly, Palau’s delegate, speaking for the Alliance of Small Island States, highlighted the need to include language ensuring equitable geographical representation and participation for developing State Parties, as well as representatives of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Another "missing principle", he said, is observer engagement in the operationalization process, especially for those entities that are from developing countries. Welcoming the intersessional work suggested in the document — including the proposed technical working group — he added that "we would need to ensure that there is substantial and dedicated representation of smaller developing States’ technical experts" in that group.
The representative of the European Union, in its capacity as observer, voiced support for full recognition of the special circumstances of small island developing States, landlocked developing countries and least developed countries. "At the same time, we recognize the centrality of the special fund for the implementation of the Agreement in all its dimensions," he stated. Focusing at this stage on just one of the principles underlying the Agreement is likely to prejudge the fund’s role as the driving force behind the full and effective implementation of all these dimensions. While recognizing the need to progress quickly, he acknowledged the need for a process enabling interactions "among us and existing funds to explore practical and cost-effective options for hosting or administering the special fund".
The representative of Antigua and Barbuda, speaking for CARICOM, called for simplified processes for application, approval and disbursement among the guiding principles included in the document. She also emphasized that the members of CARICOM, along with other developing countries, "regard the special fund as the main arm of the [Agreement’s] financial mechanism". Therefore, while pointing to the need for coherence with the Global Environment Facility trust fund — the other part of the Agreement’s financial mechanism that will fund various treaty activities — she stressed: "But, we consider this special fund to be the primary source for implementation — it should be treated accordingly."
The Preparatory Commission will reconvene on Wednesday, 27 August, to consider a refreshed text, prepared by the Co-Chairs, containing draft rules of procedure for the Conference of the Parties to the Agreement.