Delay Tactics and Rules of Procedure Debate Remain a Threat to the Future of the Plastics Treaty
PARIS, June 2, 2023 — The second Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-2) to develop a treaty to end plastic pollution was dominated by delay tactics and maneuvers to neuter any possibility of an effective treaty before negotiations of the text itself even began. Still, Member States made progress in the form of a mandate for the INC Chair, with the support of the Secretariat, to write a zero draft text of the treaty ahead of INC-3.
Using nearly three of the five days designed to begin substantive discussion of potential elements of the treaty, Member States began by reopening debate on the draft Rules of Procedure.1 David Azoulay, Director of the Environmental Health Program at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), shared, “The negotiations started with a serious step backward by re-opening the already agreed-upon rule that allowed for adopting decisions through a vote (a two-thirds majority) rather than requiring consensus. While a late-night compromise allowed the negotiations to move out of deadlock and begin substantive conversations, the issue is not settled. The core question of whether consensus voting is required can re-emerge if — and when — a vote is deemed necessary at any point in future INCs. Should that happen, there is a danger that consensus voting would allow a single country to veto any decision, which could effectively grind the entire negotiating process to a halt.”
The debate over the draft Rules of Procedure significantly abbreviated the already ambitious three days of substantive work into a handful of sessions, resulting in a cascade of effects, from curtailed observer participation to pushing significant work and necessary progress to intersessional periods.
Over the day and a half of closed-door negotiations, Member States worked through the UNEP-produced “Options for Elements Paper” to narrow options for a zero draft of the future treaty text, with key themes emerging. Giulia Carlini, Senior Attorney at CIEL reflected, “While discussions throughout the week were wide-ranging, many Member States are acknowledging the variety of impacts of the plastics life cycle on human rights, health, and the environment. Encouragingly, many Member States are calling for a reduction in plastics production, and they are acknowledging the need to ban, phase out, and/or reduce the production, consumption, and use of chemicals and polymers of concern. At the same time, there are Members still troublingly advocating for voluntary national commitments, which we know do not work. An effective treaty must include mandatory, legally-binding global obligations.”
Reflecting on the week, Jane Patton, Plastics and Petrochemicals Campaign Manager at CIEL added, “It’s no surprise that those responsible for such obvious delay tactics also want to increase plastic production. Disputes over procedural details and calls for ever-more research in the face of such a visible and well-documented crisis are desperate attempts to prevent the inevitable: the world must – and can – reduce plastic production and use to protect our health, climate, and ecosystems. Civil society, Indigenous Peoples, rightsholders, and people living on the frontlines of the crisis will not be deterred or silenced in our steadfast advocacy to ensure an effective treaty to end this plastics crisis once and for all.”
Coming out of INC-2, Member States agreed to submit ideas for intersessional work to inform the work of INC-3. Other key decisions during the week included the establishment of a Bureau and the dates and places of future negotiations.
1 The Rules of Procedure document was developed over a year ago at the Open-Ended Working Group in Dakar, and that States had decided to provisionally apply during INC-1 in Uruguay (December 2022), pending their acceptance.
###
Media Contact
Cate Bonacini, press@ciel.org, +1-202-742-5847