TWN Info Service on Climate Change
countries express concerns about Accord process
Geneva, 3 Feb (Meena Raman) -- Several developing countries are understood to have expressed their concerns about the Copenhagen Accord, or the manner in which the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Secretariat or the UN Secretary-General and the Danish Prime Minister have written to them about the Accord.
The concerns were raised in separate letters that the countries have written to the various persons concerned.
Accord arose from a meeting of 26 heads of government convened by the
Danish Prime Minister in
government conveyed its views via a letter on 14 January from the Minister
of Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, Mr. Nicolas Maduro Moros, to the Executive
Secretary of the UNFCCC, Mr. Yvo de Boer, expressing his deep concern
at the "unsuccessful outcome of the Conference of Parties to the
UNFCCC, held in
Mr. Moros said that the Danish government, which chaired the COP, acted as the spokesperson for the big powers and "tried with trickery and deception, to garner the support already not received" within the Copenhagen Conference of Parties.
He expressed alarm at the attempt to "distort the will of the majority when the Permanent Mission of Denmark, via its note verbale dated December 30, promoted among Parties the endorsement of a document that the COP only took note of and therefore, was not adopted."
The Venezuelan letter said that this initiative by the Danish Presidency seriously affects the multilateral system on climate change and "introduces a dangerous precedent that seriously alters the expressed will of the COP and affects the neutrality and credibility that should be ensured by its President".
Mr. Moros also stated that the Danish Presidency, the Prime Minister of Denmark, Lars Rasmussen, has no mandate or responsibility to try to ignore the decision of the COP15 and to encourage endorsements of a document that was not approved.
This unfortunate initiative undermines the confidence in the current Presidency, and undermines the transparency that should characterize multilateral negotiations, he added.
"We feel compelled to remind [that] the Executive Secretariat does not have a mandate to facilitate any initiative designed to support the erroneously called Copenhagen Accord', which was not adopted at the COP and should not be considered as a basis for the negotiation of a future legally binding instrument," further said the letter.
In a letter
dated 29 January,
The letter said that "a series of communications and pronouncements, claims and counter claims by various Parties and the Secretariat (of the UNFCCC) have added more to the confusion surrounding the process, its substance and status."
to better understand the Accord, its implications and to be able to
give a serious and well considered response to the invitation to associate
with the Accord",
It raised eight questions that included the following:
-- What are the existing guidelines for measuring, reporting and verifying the developed countries' quantified emission reductions commitments as contained in paragraph 4 of the Accord (which relates to mitigation by developed countries)?
-- In relation
to the mitigation actions by developing countries as referred to in
paragraph 5 of the Accord where Parties are to indicate their actions
in Appendix II by 31 January 2010,
-- What would be the nature of international consultation and analysis for non-supported actions? Who will develop the guidelines for the international consultation and analysis? Would it be a domestic process?
(Paragraph 5 of the Accord in this regard states that "non-Annex I Parties will communicate information on the implementation of their actions through National Communications, with provisions for international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines that will ensure that national sovereignty is respected.")
-- Given that the measurement, reporting and verification (of the nationally appropriate mitigation actions) in accordance with the Bali Action Plan should also apply to the provision of finance and technology, what is the link between the registry for supported mitigation actions and the financial mechanism of the Convention?
(Paragraph 5 of the Accord also states that "nationally appropriate mitigation actions seeking international support will be recorded in a registry along with relevant technology, finance and capacity building support.")
-- It asked if its understanding was correct that the provision of funding and technology would be automatic to support and enable actions that are recorded in the registry.
-- What is meant by "effective and efficient fund arrangements" for channeling the funding on adaptation as mentioned in paragraph 8 of the Accord?
-- Is there any existing definition of "most vulnerable developing country"?
8 of the Accord states that "Funding for adaptation will be prioritized
for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed
countries, small island developing States and
-- Since the mobilization of the US$100 billion is in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, does it imply that financing for adaptation actions during this period (2012-2020) will be in addition to the US$100 billion?
(Paragraph 8 of the Accord also states that "In the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, developed countries commit to a goal of mobilizing jointly US$100 billion a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries.")
to press reports from
The joint letter by Ban Ki-Moon and Rasmussen had contained a paragraph that said that the Accord would be "an essential first-step in a process leading to a robust international climate treaty".
Prime Minister's response was to reject this premise of the Rasmussen-Ban
letter and to stress that this was not the understanding of the BASIC
According to diplomatic sources, the Saudi Arabian government has also written to the UNFCCC Executive Secretary questioning the role of the Secretariat in asking member states to inform the Secretariat if they would "associate" themselves with the Accord.
Accord is not a document produced through a UNFCCC process,