CJN! intervention to the ADP

This statement is due to be delivered by Meena Raman from Third World Network, a member of Climate Justice Now! to the ADP plenary. When that plenary happens (it has been postponed several times) we will endeavour to upload a video. 

It is astounding that developed countries appear to be engaging in doublespeak here in Doha.

At your roundtable discussions, we heard them talk of climate effectiveness and ambition.

These words ring so hollow and dubious especially as developed countries are abandoning their mitigation obligations under the Kyoto Protocol or the ad-hoc working group on Long Term Cooperative Action (LCA) and or are offering no meaningful and ambitious emissions reductions in the elusive second committment period of Kyoto. 

They refuse to commit any real ambition on finance; they refuse to ensure effective technology transfer and address the problem of intellectual property rights; they refuse to support an international mechanism on loss and damage or address further adaptation concerns of developing countries under the LCA.

Instead they want more markets for not doing real emission cuts domestically with their already weak ambition.

It is not enough to have the Green Climaten Fund if it has no money. It is not enough to have a technology mechanism if it cannot ensure real technology transfer to developing countries.

With less than 5 days left to the end of the conference, we express our profound concern and outrage that the so-called “mutual reassurances” given in Durban are fast being unravelled.

If this is the case, then it is hard to envisage how the ADP process will have the trust and confidence to advance its work.

Developed countries appear to want to de-regulate the current legally-binding regime and attempt to put in place a new regime to rewrite the convention and weaken the current rules based system which is science and equity based to one that ignores historical responsibility and locks in a pledge and review world that will neither be climate effective nor based on common but differentiated responsibilities and equity.

Hence, it is indeed premature next year to talk about the architecture of the new agreement post 2020 until its scope and principles are clarified .

In addition, it is vital that informal workshops include a discussion on principles including equity and scope for the new structure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.