Rabu, 25 Juni 2008

COP9-BALI: REPORT OF DAY-2

BASEL COP9 HIGHLIGHTS, Tuesday, 24 June 2008


The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal convened for its second day on Tuesday 24 June, 2008. Delegates convened in the COW throughout the day and contact groups on technical matters, BCRCs and ship dismantling met concurrently. A finance and work programme contact group convened during the afternoon.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

REVIEW OF IMPLEMENTATION OF DECISIONS ADOPTED BY COP9: Cooperation and coordination among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions: Osvaldo Álvarez (Chile), Kerstin Stendhal (Finland) and Yue Ruisheng (China), Co-Chairs of the Ad Hoc Joint Working Group (AHJWG) on Enhancing Cooperation and Coordination between the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, presented the deliberations of the Group (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/19), a proposed recommendation (UNEP/CHW.9/14) and a note on the costs and organizational implications of establishing certain joint services of the three conventions (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/20). They noted that the proposed recommendation would: improve the implementation of the conventions at the national, regional and global levels while maintaining the autonomy of each convention; raise the political profile of the three conventions; and contribute to discussions on international environmental governance (IEG).

BRAZIL said that the recommendation broke new ground and should be considered section-by-section. The EU countered that the recommendation had been adopted by consensus by all regions and reflected a carefully worded compromise. NEW ZEALAND, INDIA, ETHIOPIA, POLAND, NORWAY, SWITZERLAND, URUGUAY, AUSTRALIA, the AFRICAN GROUP, INDONESIA, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO, ARGENTINA and CANADA supported its adoption. The EU said if parties to the Basel Convention were to adopt the recommendation, they would put the Convention as a forerunner of the process and send a positive signal to the IEG process in the UN. NEW ZEALAND, supported by MEXICO, said that the work of the AHJWG represented a way forward in driving IEG discussions.

In response to several questions from BRAZIL, the AHJWG Co-Chairs clarified that, on issues such as compliance, where only the Basel Convention had a mechanism, information would be exchanged once the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions developed such mechanisms. Regarding BCRCs, they said the recommendation would ensure BCRCs delivered their work in accordance with defined priorities. UNEP discussed resource mobilization and said it supported enhanced synergies and cooperation and would meet the costs of the recommendation as outlined in the document (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/30). JAPAN supported the recommendation provided that it did not result in an increased budget for the three conventions. Further discussion on the issue was deferred until Wednesday.

Financial Matters: Kummer Peiry presented the budget (UNEP/CHW.9/35) and stressed the need to consider financial matters and priorities together. She explained that three scenarios had been developed, namely: the Executive Secretary’s assessment of the required rate of growth; increasing the operational budget of 2007-2008 by 10 per cent nominal growth; and maintaining the 2007-2008 level in nominal terms. She stressed the first scenario was the only one that would allow the Secretariat to continue activities at its current level, and proposed that a working group consider the work programme as well as the budget, so that the two were compatible.

In the ensuing discussion, the EU said it would propose a one-time, three-year budget instead of following the customary biennial cycle. He said this would both provide significant cost savings and bring the Basel Convention’s budget cycle in line with those of UNEP and the Stockholm Convention, as recommended by the AHJWG. JAPAN, NORWAY and SWITZERLAND expressed interest in the proposal. The EU urged parties still in arrears to pay their assessed contributions. He suggested the Secretariat prepare a report on its efforts to correct this situation for COP10. JAPAN and MEXICO supported zero nominal growth in contributions and said that a more efficient use of resources should be pursued.

NORWAY opined that the Secretariat’s advisory role demanded increased resources and, supported by SWITZERLAND, urged that core activities be financed through the core budget rather than through voluntary contributions. SWITZERLAND said it could support a 10 per cent budget increase, provided that synergies with the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions were improved and all parties paid their contributions. The Committee agreed to establish a contact group on finance and the work programme to be co-chaired by Karel Blaha (Czech Republic) and Messalegne Mesfin (Ethiopia).

Resource mobilization and sustainable financing: The Secretariat outlined its resource mobilization activities (UNEP/CHW.9/34). The EU said future actions should be conducted within the context of the review of the Strategic Plan and called on the Secretariat to work with donors to develop innovative projects. He said a new decision for resource mobilization was not required at COP9. The draft decision was forwarded to the contact group on finance and the work programme for further consideration.

OTHER MATTERS

Strategic issues for consideration by COP10 and COP11: The Secretariat introduced a draft decision on a process to evaluate the effectiveness of the Basel Convention at COP11 (UNEP/CHW.9/38), noting that Article 15(7) of the Convention required such an evaluation.

Several delegations said the proposed evaluation was timely. The EU suggested that its scope was too ambitious and risked taking a large portion of the Secretariat’s limited time and resources. He cautioned against delaying the ongoing review processes and the entry into force of the Ban Amendment. TANZANIA urged that the Ban Amendment not be subjected to the evaluation process before its entry into force. NIGERIA, supported by SRI LANKA and others, requested the purpose of the evaluation be clarified. CANADA and SWITZERLAND proposed that COP9 launch a solid evaluation process with guidance from parties and that an ad hoc working group be established for that purpose. NORWAY and JAPAN supported a step-by-step process and said that it was premature to decide that a review of the Convention should be conducted at COP11. JAPAN urged basing the evaluation on scientific data to ensure its objectivity. The Committee agreed to consider the draft decision in informal consultations to be led by Canada on Wednesday morning.

Strategic Plan for the Implementation of the Basel Convention: The Secretariat introduced a report on the work programme (UNEP/CHW.9/4) and a review of the Strategic Plan (UNEP/CHW.9/5). The EU said the implementation of the Strategic Plan was not effective enough and, with SWITZERLAND and CHINA, called for an analysis of its successes and failures. He highlighted that UNEP had made hazardous wastes one of its priorities and that the new strategic plan should reflect this.

The implementation of the timing and construction of a new strategic plan was referred to the informal group chaired by Canada for further exploration.

Legal matters: Regarding a draft decision proposed by the Secretariat on the Technical Cooperation Trust Fund (UNEP/CHW.9/27), ARGENTINA proposed adding a reference urging the parties that were in a position to do so to contribute to the Fund. With this amendment, the Committee referred the draft decision to plenary. On enforcement (UNEP/CHW.9/28), the COW agreed to forward the draft decision to plenary without amendment. On the Protocol on Liability and Compensation (UNEP/CHW.9/29), KENYA proposed a sentence requesting the Secretariat to prepare an information paper analyzing recent hazardous waste dumping incidents. The draft decision, as amended by Kenya, was forwarded to plenary.

Draft decisions on national definitions of hazardous wastes (UNEP/CHW.9/31) and on agreements and arrangements (UNEP/CHW.9/32) were forwarded to plenary without amendment.

A note and draft decision on designation of competent authorities and focal points (UNEP/CHW.9/33) was also approved and forwarded to plenary without amendment.

A note on the interpretation of Article 17(5) (UNEP/CHW.9/30) and comments received from parties (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/27) were discussed. Stating that the issue was a strictly legal one, JAPAN said consideration of the matter should be detached from political considerations and, with INDIA, NEW ZEALAND, REPUBLIC OF KOREA and THAILAND, expressed support for the "current time approach" in line with the practice of the UN Office of Legal Affairs. The EU and NORWAY backed the "fixed time approach" and urged resolving the issue at COP9 to ensure early entry into force of the Ban Amendment. BRAZIL and others said the Convention would be strengthened by the Ban Amendment’s entry into force. The Basel Action Network said that “great damage” was being done by the Ban Amendment lying in a “bureaucratic coma” and urged parties to reject the current time approach, as it would be the Amendment’s “death sentence.”

CONTACT GROUPS

BCRCs: The group discussed the review of the operation of BCRCs (UNEP/CHW.9/7) throughout the day. On the issue of developing strategies for sustainable financing, BCRC host countries called for a global financing model that could apply across centres and be individually implemented. Others emphasized that financial models should be developed by each centre independently. Participants disagreed on who should be named in the draft decision to support the work of the centres. Suggested actors included: developed countries, host countries, regional members served by the centres, multilateral donors and those with the capacity to contribute. Some participants focused on the need for immediate support for BCRCs, while others stressed the importance of building the BCRCs’ self-sufficiency and autonomy.

TECHNICAL MATTERS: The contact group on technical matters met in the morning to discuss the table of contents (ToC) of the draft revised technical guidelines on the ESM of used tyres. Participants strove for consistency with other Basel Convention technical guidelines, reordered paragraphs and debated what should be included in annexes and appendices. In the afternoon, they reviewed and agreed on the draft decisions on mercury and POP wastes. Discussions continued on the revised ToC and consensus was reached after a debate on, among other things, keeping terminology strictly in line with that of the Convention or going for a clear and useable set of guidelines that would be applied by people who may not be familiar with the Convention. In the evening, discussions centered on the draft decision on tyres.

DISMANTLING OF SHIPS: Discussions focused on the OEWG’s work programme on ship dismantling. Participants agreed the OEWG would carry out a preliminary assessment on whether the IMO ship recycling convention, once adopted, establishes an equivalent level of control to that of the Basel Convention. Some favored reiterating the Basel Convention’s principles as guidelines for the task, while others argued that the OEWG’s work should be situated in a more general context and not be prejudged with regard to equivalence in the levels of control. The OEWG’s work on the duplication of regulatory instruments was deferred because the outcome of the IMO convention remained unknown. In the afternoon the group discussed the Global Programme for Sustainable Ship Recycling, with one country voicing concerns about the Programme’s narrow focus on Asia. In the evening, participants agreed on an amended draft decision to be forwarded to the COW for approval.

IN THE CORRIDORS

Some delegates feared that the process to evaluate the effectiveness of the Convention proposed by the Secretariat represented yet another effort by long-time Ban opponents to delay the entry into force of the Ban Amendment. According to some rumblings, behind the proposal lay a “hidden agenda” to weaken, rather than strengthen, the Convention’s key objectives, in particular the minimization of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and the minimization of waste generation at source.
Concerns were heightened by a rumor that a “non-paper” was being prepared on the interpretation of Article 17(5) whereby the COP would assert that the number of ratifications required for the Ban Amendment had not yet been met.

COP9-BALI: REPORT OF DAY-1, Monday, 23 June 2008

COP9-BALI: REPORT OF DAY-1, Monday, 23 June 2008


The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal convened on Monday 23 June, 2008. In the morning delegates enjoyed a welcoming ceremony and heard opening speeches. During the afternoon, delegates addressed organizational matters and established a Committee of the Whole (COW) to discuss substantive agenda items. In the evening, contact groups met on the Basel Convention Regional Centres (BCRCs), and on technical matters and dismantling of ships.

OPENING OF THE MEETING

Hyoman Yasa, Executive Secretary, Province of Bali, delivered a welcoming speech on behalf of the Governor of Bali, highlighting the Province’s efforts to protect the environment, and underscoring the links between a healthy environment and a sound economy.

COP8 President John Njoroge Michuki, Minister of Environment (Kenya), noted that several COP8 decisions had not been implemented due to a lack of funds. He expressed hope that COP9 would address pending issues, including the establishment of a financial mechanism and the interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17 (entry into force of amendments).

Delegates elected Rachmat Nadi Witoelar Kartaadipoetra, State Minister for the Environment (Indonesia), as COP9 President by acclamation. He underscored the theme of the conference “Waste Management for Human Health and Livelihood,” noting the impacts of hazardous waste on people and nature. He said the illegal traffic of hazardous waste showed no sign of decreasing and the generation of such waste was increasing.

Katharina Kummer Peiry, Executive Secretary of the Basel Convention, reminded delegates of the Convention’s achievements, including: tackling the problem of e-waste; engaging in international efforts on ship dismantling; collaborating with UNEP to strengthen Côte d’Ivoire’s hazardous waste handling capacity; increasing stakeholder involvement; strengthening the capacities of developing countries through the BCRCs; and formulating draft technical guidelines for used tyres and mercury waste. She pointed to challenges facing the Convention, including considering the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Joint Working Group on Enhancing Cooperation and Coordination among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions and the creation of a solid financial basis for the Basel Convention. She hoped that COP9 would place the Basel Convention firmly on the international agenda and reaffirm its implementation as a prerequisite to sustainable development.

Chile, on behalf of the GROUP OF LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN COUNTRIES (GRULAC), lamented the strategic plan’s slow implementation and expressed concern about the English-only availability of some official documentation at this meeting. Nigeria, on behalf of the AFRICAN GROUP, highlighted toxic waste dumping incidents in Nigeria and Côte d’Ivoire and encouraged: a “more pragmatic approach” to financing; resolution of the debate over the Ban Amendment’s entry into force; and further capacity building efforts for the Convention’s enforcement. CÔTE D’IVOIRE expressed appreciation to the international community for its support in dealing with hazardous waste in Abdijan and offered to host COP10. Egypt, on behalf of the ARAB GROUP, raised concern about the increase in illegal global trade of hazardous waste, particularly in areas of armed conflict. The United Kingdom, on behalf of the WESTERN EUROPEAN AND OTHERS GROUP (WEOG), emphasized the challenges facing the Convention.

ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS

Delegates elected Mary Harwood (Australia), Magda Gosk (Poland), Osvaldo Álvarez (Chile), and Angelina Madete (Tanzania) as COP9 Vice Presidents. Angelina Madete was elected Rapporteur. Delegates adopted the provisional agenda (UNEP/CHW9/1 and Add.1) without amendment. COP9 President suggested, and delegates agreed, to establish a COW to address substantive agenda items, with Mary Harwood as Chair.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Chair Harwood opened the deliberations in the afternoon. Regarding the issues to be addressed, SWITZERLAND highlighted the formulation of a strong commitment to the sound management of hazardous wastes and the review of the implementation of the Convention and of the Strategic Plan as priorities. CANADA and NORWAY stressed the importance of the review of the effectiveness of the Convention.

REVIEW OF IMPLEMENTATION OF DECISIONS ADOPTED BY COP9: Basel Convention Regional and Coordinating Centres (BCRCs): Chair Harwood opened discussion on: a recommendation of the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme (SACEP) to establish a new BCRC in South Asia (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/8); a regional needs assessment report (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/8/Add.1); comments on the referred proposal (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/9); and a review of the proposal (UNEP/CHW.9/8). Several delegates explicitly reiterated the importance of BCRCs as an implementation instrument for the Basel Convention, but disagreed over whether a new centre should be established. France, on behalf of the EU, and CANADA suggested that decisions on the establishment of new centres be postponed until after the review of existing centres is complete. IRAN cautioned against overlap in BCRC membership. PAKISTAN commented that no regional centre was fully addressing the issues of e-waste and ship dismantling in South Asia.

SACEP stressed that its proposal had been long-standing and endorsed by its eight member countries. LIBYA stated that the establishment of the new centre should have been approved earlier. Delegates agreed to refer this issue to the Contact Group on BCRCs.

Technical Matters: The Secretariat introduced the revised technical guidelines on environmentally sound management (ESM) of used tyres and the related draft decision and noted that an informal consultation had been held on 22 June 2008. BRAZIL said that the revised technical guidelines furthered those adopted in 1999, improving sections on, inter alia, the prevention and reduction of waste generation and the potential risks to human health and the environment, and adding new parts, including on technical terms. The EU proposed several amendments, including to the draft’s structure. CAMBODIA urged the guidelines to also address motorcycle tyres. THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA highlighted the issue of mosquitoes in tyre piles. The matter was referred to the contact group.

The EU, INDONESIA, TANZANIA and others supported further work on the technical guidelines on the ESM of mercury waste. Noting that work on mercury was occurring in various international fora, NORWAY suggested that it could be the building block for a future legally binding regime on mercury. JAPAN recalled the problems it faced with Minamata Disease, but cautioned that duplication with other efforts should be avoided.

Regarding the technical guidelines on the ESM of persistent organic pollutant (POP) wastes, the EU suggested that the Stockholm Convention on POPs include experts from the Basel Convention in its review of best available techniques (BAT) and best environmental practices (BEP) to improve coordination in waste management. INDONESIA disagreed with the inclusion of a concentration limit of POPs in wastes, explaining that this could lead to the import of waste with low POP contents.

Delegates referred discussion on technical guidelines on tyres, mercury waste and POP wastes to a contact group for further consideration.

Dismantling of ships: The Secretariat introduced the documents on ship dismantling: ESM of ship dismantling (UNEP/CHW.9/34); report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) of IMO (UNEP/CHW/INF/28); compilation of comments on the ESM of ship dismantling (UNEP/CHW/INF/29); and a document submitted by the Basel Secretariat to the MEPC (UNEP/CHW/INF/30). INDONESIA said that effective short and medium term measures for the ESM of ship dismantling should be explored and discussed, and the level of control clarified. The EU noted it would monitor progress in the development of the IMO draft Convention on the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships to ensure that it established a level of control equivalent to that of the Basel Convention. The NGO PLATFORM ON SHIPBREAKING and the BANGLADESH ENVIRONMENT LAWYERS ASSOCIATION expressed concern that the proposed IMO convention would not have the same level of control. CHINA highlighted the importance of technical assistance and support to developing countries to enable them to achieve environmentally sound ship recycling. TURKEY urged parties to support its pilot project on ship dismantling. A contact group was established to discuss the draft decision on ship dismantling.

CONTACT GROUPS

BCRCs: Prakash Kowlesser (Mauritius) chaired the contact group and asked delegates to craft a draft decision by Wednesday, based on the Secretariat’s proposed text (UNEP/CHW.9/7). Delegates supported a proposal to encourage information and expertise exchange among the BCRCs', as it was seen to promote South-South cooperation.

Adding “promoting political guidance,” as set by the COP for BCRCs, to the role of the Secretariat led to debate, as some felt this pre-empted other decisions about the BCRCs’ independence. Some delegates stressed the need to focus on BCRC’s self-sufficiency, while others emphasized the continued role of the Secretariat in supporting their activities.

TECHNICAL MATTERS: The contact group on technical matters, chaired by Mohammed Khashashneh (Jordan), gathered in the evening. Delegates discussed EU proposals on: the draft revised technical guidelines on the ESM of used tyres; and revision of the draft decisions on the ESM of POP wastes, and of mercury waste. They agreed to reconvene on Tuesday morning to discuss these two issues. On the EU proposal on ESM of POP wastes, the group agreed to prepare a new text, bracketing a few areas.

DISMANTLING OF SHIPS: Chaired by Roy Watkinson (UK), the contact group agreed to use the draft decision proposed by the Secretariat (UNEP/CHW.9/34) as the basis for work and identified several paragraphs, as well as the Global Programme for Sustainable Ship Recycling, as matters requiring further discussion. Delegates raised several issues of concern, including the lack of agreement about criteria for “equivalent level of control,” the division of competences between the draft IMO ship recycling convention and the Basel Convention to avoid duplication of regulatory instruments, and the work programme for the OEWG.

IN THE CORRIDORS
As delegates began tackling COP9’s heavy agenda, some, having based their positions on English-only documents, were concerned that this affected their ability to negotiate trickier matters. Most predicted protracted negotiations on the issue of financing, as the Secretariat’s administrative costs and the costs of implementing the Convention in developing countries, in particular through the BCRCs, required a substantial increase in contributions. Many feared parties’ pockets may not be deep enough at the present time, with waste low on governments’ environmental shopping list. Others foretold of controversial issues, including the interpretation of Article 17(5) of the Convention and the entry into force of the Ban Amendment, the final adoption of the guidelines of the Mobile Phone Partnership Initiative - which some felt were not stringent enough, and the guidelines on the ESM of used tyres – on which one delegate was heard wondering if the Convention was “barking up the wrong tree” as many question whether used tyres should be considered “hazardous” at all.

COP9-BALI-A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE BASEL CONVENTION

NINTH CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO THE BASEL CONVENTION
23 - 27 JUNE 2008


The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal begins Monday, 23 June 2008 in Bali, Indonesia. The theme of COP9 is “Waste Management for Human Health and Livelihood,” which will be considered during the COP’s high-level segment on Thursday and Friday, 26 and 27 June respectively.

The key issues to be considered by COP9 include: the 2009-2010 programme of work; a budget for the Basel Convention trust funds for 2009-2010; a recommendation for improved cooperation and coordination between the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions developed by the Ad Hoc Joint Working Group on Cooperation and Coordination; initiating a process to develop a successor arrangement for the Strategic Plan beyond 2010; agreeing to an approach towards reaching an agreed interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the Convention (and entry into force of amendments); and initiating a process leading to an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Convention at COP11, in accordance with paragraph 7 of Article 15 of the Convention.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE BASEL CONVENTION

The Basel Convention was adopted in 1989 and entered into force on 5 May 1992. It was created to address concerns over the management, disposal and transboundary movement of the estimated 400 million tonnes of hazardous wastes that are produced worldwide each year. The guiding principles of the Convention are that transboundary movements of hazardous wastes should: be reduced to a minimum; managed in an environmentally sound manner; be treated and disposed of as close as possible to their source of generation; and be minimized at the source. There are currently 170 parties to the Convention.

COP1: The first COP was held in Piriapolis, Uruguay, from 3-4 December 1992. COP1 requested industrialized countries to prohibit the transboundary movements of hazardous wastes for final disposal to developing countries (Decision I/22). Decision I/22 also noted that the transboundary movements of wastes for the purpose of recovering and recycling materials should take place in accordance with the requirement that the wastes be handled in an environmentally sound manner. Decision I/22 is not legally binding, and a “pro-ban coalition,” consisting of developing countries, Greenpeace and the Nordic states, urged delegates to adopt the ban as a binding amendment to the Convention. The issue of hazardous wastes destined for recycling and recovery was forwarded to the Technical Working Group (TWG) for further study.

COP2: During the second COP, held in Geneva from 21-25 March 1994, parties agreed on an immediate ban on the export of hazardous wastes intended for final disposal from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries to non-OECD countries. Parties also agreed to ban, by 31 December 1997, the export of wastes intended for recovery or recycling (Decision II/12) from OECD to non-OECD countries. Since Decision II/12 was not incorporated into the text of the Convention itself, the issue of whether or not the ban was legally binding was unclear.

COP3: At the third COP, held in Geneva from 18-22 September 1995, the ban was adopted as an amendment to the Convention (Decision III/1). The Ban Amendment does not use the OECD/non-OECD membership distinction but bans the export of hazardous wastes for final disposal and recycling from Annex VII countries (EU, OECD and Liechtenstein) to non-Annex VII countries. According to Article 17, paragraph 5, entry into force of amendments takes place upon ratification by at least three-fourths of the parties “who accepted them.” There are differing interpretations over the term “who accepted them” and therefore over the number of ratifications required for the Ban Amendment to enter into force. Some parties suggest that the number is 62, that is, three-fourths of parties at the time of adoption of the Ban Amendment. Others, including the UN Office of Legal Affairs, argue that three-fourths of current parties must ratify the Ban Amendment. To date, the Ban Amendment had been ratified by 63 parties. COP3 mandated the TWG to continue its work on the characterization of “hazardous wastes” and the development of lists of wastes that are hazardous (Decision III/12).

COP4: Two of the major decisions adopted at the fourth COP, held in Kuching, Malaysia, from 23-27 February 1998, related to the Ban Amendment. COP4 considered proposals by countries seeking to join Annex VII and decided that the composition of this annex would remain unchanged until the Ban Amendment entered into force (Decision IV/8). In this decision, COP4 also requested the Secretariat to undertake a study of issues related to Annex VII. On the question of which wastes should be covered by the Ban, COP4 considered the proposal put forward by the TWG on List A, identifying hazardous wastes, and List B, identifying non-hazardous wastes. COP4 decided to incorporate these lists as Annex VIII and Annex IX to the Convention, respectively.

COP5: The fifth COP met in Basel, Switzerland, from 6-10 December 1999, when delegates celebrated the tenth anniversary of the Convention’s adoption. They also adopted the Protocol on Liability and Compensation for Damage Resulting from Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, and a “Basel Declaration” for promoting the environmentally sound management (ESM) of hazardous wastes over the next ten years, along with a decision setting the next decade’s agenda. To date, eight parties have ratified the Protocol on Liability and Compensation, which will enter into force upon receipt of 20 instruments of ratification. The COP also adopted decisions covering the Convention’s implementation and monitoring, legal matters, prevention and monitoring of illegal traffic, technical matters and institutional, financial and procedural arrangements.

COP6: The sixth COP met in Geneva, Switzerland, from 9-14 December 2002. COP6 restated the importance of the Basel Convention’s goals relating to sustainable development and launched a partnership programme with environmental non-governmental organizations, industry and business. The COP adopted decisions on issues relating to the implementation of the Convention, amendment of the Convention and its annexes and institutional, financial and procedural arrangements. COP6 also agreed on guidance elements for the detection, prevention and control of illegal traffic in hazardous wastes, and on technical guidelines for ESM of biomedical and healthcare wastes, plastic wastes, waste from lead-acid batteries and ship dismantling. Delegates at COP6 agreed to promote further cooperation between the Basel Secretariat and other organizations and secretariats involved in chemicals management. COP6 set the budget for 2003-2005, agreed on a compliance mechanism for the Convention, adopted a Strategic Plan, and finalized a framework agreement on the legal establishment of the Basel Convention Regional Centres (BCRCs) for training and technology transfer.

COP7: At the seventh COP, held in Geneva from 25-29 October 2004, delegates considered decisions on a range of issues relating to the BCRCs, the Basel Convention Partnership Programme, institutional arrangements, the Ban Amendment and the Basel Protocol on Liability and Compensation. COP7 also adopted decisions on definitions of hazardous wastes, hazardous waste characteristics and a number of technical guidelines. Delegates adopted decisions on guidance elements for bilateral, multilateral or regional agreements and on the follow-up to the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). After protracted negotiations, COP7 set the budget for 2005-2006 and took decisions on the Strategic Plan and the 2005-2006 work programme for the OEWG.

COP8: The eighth COP was held from 27 November to 1 December 2006 in Nairobi, Kenya. COP8 opened against the backdrop of a toxic waste dumping incident in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire. Delegates considered reports on activities within the Convention’s mandate and adopted a declaration on e-waste and more than 30 decisions on, inter alia: the 2007-2008 programme of work; the implementation of the Strategic Plan, including consideration of the work and operations of the BCRCs, as well as the Basel Convention Partnership Programme; synergies and cooperation; e-waste and end-of-life equipment; ship dismantling; legal matters; amendments to the general technical guidelines for the ESM of persistent organic pollutant (POP) wastes; guidelines for the ESM of wastes; and the election of new members of the Compliance Committee and the Committee’s work programme.

INTERSESSIONAL HIGHLIGHTS

AD HOC JOINT WORKING GROUP: The Ad hoc Joint Working Group of the Stockholm, Rotterdam and Basel conventions held three meetings to prepare joint recommendations on enhanced cooperation and coordination among the three conventions. The first meeting was held from 26-28 March 2007 in Helsinki, Finland. At that meeting the group agreed on a non-exhaustive list of objectives and guiding principles to be applied in its future work. The second meeting, held from 10-13 December 2007 in Vienna, Austria, agreed to focus its work on four themes: organizational issues in the field; technical substantive issues; information management and public awareness issues; and administrative issues. The Working Group adopted a recommendation at its third meeting (25-28 March 2008, Rome, Italy), which has been submitted to COP9.

OEWG6: The sixth session of the OEWG took place in Geneva, Switzerland, from 3-7 September 2007. The meeting considered several issues, including: the development of a work plan on e-waste for 2009/2010; the ESM of mercury wastes; ship dismantling; the interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the Basel Convention; the revised technical guidelines on ESM of used tyres; and illegal traffic, reviewing the outline of an instruction manual for the legal profession. In total, the Group adopted 28 decisions.

COMMITTEE FOR ADMINISTERING THE MECHANISM FOR PROMOTING IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPLIANCE: The Committee held its fifth and sixth sessions on 8-9 September 2007 and 28-29 February 2008, respectively. In addition to implementing its work programme for the biennium 2007-2008, the Committee considered how it could better use its full capacity in the future. The Committee reviewed the activities that it had undertaken since its establishment, identified possible limitations and developed its proposed work programme for the biennium 2009–2010.

OPEN-ENDED WORKING GROUP ON MERCURY: The First Meeting of UNEP’s Ad hoc Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) to Review and Assess Measures to Address the Global Issue of Mercury was held from 12-16 November 2007, in Bangkok, Thailand. The OEWG discussed options for enhanced voluntary measures, and new or existing international legal instruments on mercury. Delegates agreed on tasks to be undertaken during the intersessional period, including analysis on, inter alia: financial considerations of a free-standing convention, a new protocol to the Stockholm Convention and voluntary measures; technology transfer; implementation options; organization of response measures; meeting demand for mercury if primary production is phased out; major mercury containing products and processes with effective substitutes; and funding.
UNEP GOVERNING COUNCIL/GMEF: The tenth special session of the UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum was held in Monaco in February 2008. Among other things, the GC/GMEF adopted a decision on chemicals management, including mercury and waste management. The Basel Convention Secretariat was asked to provide further input on waste management by the end of May 2008 to be presented to the 25th session of UNEP Governing Council in February 2009.

This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin © is written and edited by Melanie Ashton, Paula Barrios, Ph.D., Kate Neville, Olivia Pasini, Anne Roemer-Mahler, and Kunbao Xia. The Digital Editor is Markus Staas. The Editor is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. and the Director of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI . The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the United Kingdom (through the Department for International Development – DFID), the Government of the United States of America (through the Department of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), the Government of Canada (through CIDA), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMU), the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the European Commission (DG-ENV) and the Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and Sea. General Support for the Bulletin during 2008 is provided by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Australia, the Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, the Ministry of Environment of Sweden, the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, SWAN International, Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies - IGES), the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (through the Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute - GISPRI) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Funding for translation of the Bulletin into French has been provided by the International Organization of the Francophonie (IOF). Funding for the translation of the Bulletin into Spanish has been provided by the Ministry of Environment of Spain. The opinions expressed in the Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other donors. Excerpts from the Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at , +1-646-536-7556 or 300 East 56th St., 11A, New York, NY 10022, USA. The ENB team at Basel COP9 can be contacted by e-mail at .


Back to IISD RS "Linkages" home Visit IISDnet Send e-mail to IISD RS
© 2008, IISD. All rights reserved.