September 2008
The Sixth Forum of the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemicals Safety (IFCS) met in Dakar Senegal, 15-19 September, 2008. Due to the adoption of the SAICM by the first International Conference on Chemical Safety (ICCM) in 2006, the most critical question facing Forum VI was whether it should continue to exist and, if it does, what its functions and institutional and structural character should be. This question has become especially important in light of the decisions of most donor countries to devote their available resources to SAICM and no longer to support IFCS.
Contact Group Negotiations
After an initial exchange of views, the Forum established a contact group to develop a draft resolution on the future of IFCS. The contact group based its work on a document prepared earlier this year by the Forum Standing Committee and the SAICM regional representatives. The contact group soon focused on two options: (a) modify IFCS as a distinct/independent institutional arrangement that avoids duplication, enhances synergies, and saves costs;
(b) integrate IFCS into ICCM by making IFCS an ICCM subsidiary body.
A majority of Forum participants preferred the first of these options, because it would be most similar to the Forum as it has existed in the past. However, none of the donors that have traditionally supported the Forum were willing to support this option, making it increasingly obvious to most participants that if they chose it, then the IFCS would soon be bankrupt and forced to end its operations. Moreover, the first option would not well serve the goals of strengthening the SAICM and maximizing the ability of the Forum to serve as an important and influential input to ICCM. Accordingly, after two days of vigorous debate, the contact group agreed to negotiate on the basis of the latter option, provided that there were sufficient safeguards to ensure that the Forum would retain its key, essential elements if the ICCM agreed to integrate it into ICCM.
Throughout all of the week, CIEL engaged in a very significant amount of “shuttle diplomacy” between all of the regional Vice Presidents, plus additional countries of each region, to develop and table negotiating texts, enhance mutual understanding, and move the contact group towards a consensus that could preserve the core Forum functions, strengthen SAICM, enhance integration, and be politically and financially viable. In his capacity as one of the contact group’s co-chairs, Jamidu Katima (who is also one of IPEN’s co-chairs) was essential in keeping the contact group focused and on-track. Despite many challenges and detours along the way, our efforts resulted in a consensus text from the contact group, which was then adopted by the Forum on its final day.
Highlights of the Adopted Resolution Include:
1. The Forum’s new role “is to provide an open, transparent, and inclusive forum for enhancing knowledge and common understanding about current, new and emerging issues related to sound chemicals management.”
2. The Forum’s new functions are to: (a) “Provide all stakeholders, especially developing countries and countries with economies in transition, an opportunity to share and acquire information through open discussion and debate;
(b) “Provide an independent, objective source of synthesized information about chemicals management issues, including potential health, environmental and socioeconomic impacts and possible response actions; and
(c) “Prepare and disseminate reports that reflect a state-of-the-art understanding of key subjects; are based on solid scientific evidence; ensure a balance of existing view points; and package accurate, relevant and important information in accessible language that educates and may stimulate action, particularly for ICCM.”
3. The Forum invites ICCM-2 to integrate the Forum into ICCM by establishing IFCS as an ICCM advisory body. Under the ICCM rules of procedure (as they were applied at ICCM-1), such a body would be a subsidiary body of ICCM.
4. The Forum invites ICCM to include six “key elements” in the terms of reference for the new IFCS. These six elements represent the most important qualities of the Forum and include:
(a) Representatives of governments, inter-governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations and other representatives from civil society, should all be entitled to attend and fully participate in Forum organized meetings (e.g. ad-hoc working groups, plenary, regional, etc.).
(b) The representative of each government should be a senior official concerned with chemical safety, including health and environmental issues. Advisers may accompany each representative. Governments should ensure that their delegations reflect the full range of national interests.
(c) The Forum should, in addition to undertaking tasks assigned to it by the ICCM, be able to raise issues, including new and emerging issues, for discussion at the Forum in order to fulfill its role and functions and, in particular, to stimulate action by the ICCM.
(d) The Forum should continue to follow the lead country/sponsor/ organization approach to preparing materials for agenda items.
(e) The Forum should meet during the ICCM intersessional period, in time to contribute to ICCM processes.
(f) The bureau/standing committee of the Forum should comprise government representatives and representatives of IGOs, NGOs and other groups in civil society.
5. Finally, the Forum agreed that, until ICCM may decide to integrate the Forum into ICCM as described in the resolution, the Forum will continue to function under its current terms of reference.
This last point, along with the six “key elements,” was essential in achieving agreement that the Forum should be integrated into ICCM.
Prominent Participants in the Negotiations
All of the Forum regional Vice Presidents were very active in the negotiations. Additionally, several other governments also participated very actively. They included:
GRULAC: Suriname (Vice President), Argentina, Chile
Asia and Pacific: Iran (Vice President), Thailand
Africa: Nigeria (Vice President), Tanzania
CEE: Slovenia (Vice President), Czech Republic
WEOG: Switzerland (Vice President), United Kingdom, Germany
Most IPEN Participating Organizations provided their input on the issue through their active participation in the Forum regional groups that met at least once every day. Others, such as Romy Quijano and Lilian Corra, attended and intervened directly in the Future of IFCS contact group sessions.
Conclusion
Achieving a consensus decision by the Forum that the Forum should be integrated into ICCM is a major step towards ensuring that the core Forum functions and elements are preserved and that the SAICM may realize more of the potential that we believed it had when we were originally developing it. That said, we must recognize that the political hurdles of getting ICCM-2 to agree to integrate the Forum are exceedingly high. Moreover, the practical challenges of developing and advocating terms of reference and rules of procedure for the new Forum are daunting, including because of the intensely active chemicals agenda between now and May 2009.
We face great challenges on this issue in the upcoming months. However, I believe both the Forum and SAICM are worth it. I hope you will join me in doing what it takes to succeed.