Removing AOB from agendas

Legal assistance paper

All reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of this information at the time the advice was produced (please refer to the date produced below). However, the materials have been prepared for informational purposes only and may have been superseded by more recent developments. They do not constitute formal legal advice or create a lawyer-client relationship. You should seek legal advice to take account of your own interests. To the extent permitted any liability is excluded. Those consulting the database may wish to contact LRI for clarifications and an updated analysis.

Date produced: 22/06/2019

  1. What are the impacts of removing ‘any other matters’ as an item from a provisional COP agenda?
  2. What limitations does reliance on SB conclusions to cover miscellaneous other issues impose? Do SB conclusions adequately cover miscellaneous other issues?


1. Removing ‘any other matters’ as an item from the COP provisional agenda would mean that issues could no longer be raised or addressed under that agenda item.

In the past issues considered under ‘any other matters’ have included the following topics (based on a review of COP 6 – COP 21):

COP 6 – part 1, The Hague: (1) The COP acting on the joint recommendation of the SBSTA and SBI adopted resolution 1/CP.6 entitled “Solidarity with South African countries, particularly Mozambique” (FCCC/CP/2000/5/Add.2, section II); and (2) COP endorsed the requests for further work recommended by the chairmen of the subsidiary bodies, relating to “Work concerning least developed countries” “Work on accounting, reporting and reviews under Articles 5, 7 and 8 of the Kyoto Protocol”, and “Work on policies and measures” (see FCCC/CP/2000/5/Add.2, section III).

COP 6 – part 2, Bonn: (1) a proposal was raised by Canada on the potential of clean energy to contribute to the global environmental benefits; and (2) the Parties requested the Secretariat organise a workshop of governmental experts on the issues of Articles 5, 7 and 8 of the Kyoto Protocol prior to the 7th session of the Conference and to seek the necessary contributions from outside the core budget.

COP 7: (1) a request was submitted from a group of countries including Central Asia, the Caucasus, Albania and Moldova regarding their status under the Convention, such that all provisions considered with regard to developing countries should apply to the members of this group as well in view of their economic circumstances and their need to address the problems of climate change; and (2) a request to adopt the decision in adopting decision 36/CP.7 regarding improving female participation.

COP 8: Iceland and Monaco notified of their intention to use the provisions of decision 14/CP.7 for the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol – whereby CO2 emissions from a single project which add, in any one year of that period, more than 5% to the total CO2 in 1990 of a Party listed in Annex B to the Protocol are reported separately and are not included in national totals.

COP 9: (1) Switzerland delivered a joint statement with Canada, the European Community, Iceland, New Zealand and Norway, reaffirming the political commitment made in Bonn 2001 to provide $410 million on an annual basis as of 2005 to developing countries; (2) Cuba delivered a statement, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, urging the GEF secretariat to take the necessary actions to guarantee the representation of the Caribbean Constituency at the GEF Council meetings; and (3) Russia delivered a statement drawing attention to decision 16/CP.7, para 2, regarding preparatory work by the secretariat on issues relating to Article 6 of the KP.

COP 14: Several Parties made statements on the conference room paper on the informal ministerial round table held on a shared vision for long-term cooperative action, that it did not include a specific reference to common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities and the principle of equity.

COP 18: The EU and Croatia made a proposal on enhancing women representation in the UNFCCC.

COP 20: Representative of four Parties (including on behalf of EU and its member states) made statements. COP agreed to consider the proposal from Peru in collaboration with Poland on a ministerial declaration on education and awareness raising, and the President would conduct consultations on this matter. The President also adopted decision 21/CP.20 entitled “The Lima Ministerial Declaration on Education and Awareness-raising”.

COP 22: (1) The President had proposed to convene open-ended informal consultations, on the request of Turkey, to seek access to support from the GCF and the CTCN. The President reported that he will continue to undertake open-ended informal consultations on this matter; (2) COP agreed to adopt an incremental approach to developing the local communities and indigenous peoples platform with a view to ensuring its effective operationalization and requested the SBSTA and SBI to develop recommendations for operationalization of the platform to COP 23; (3) The President requested developed country Parties and other Parties and non-Party stakeholders to provide financial resources for operationalizing the platform; and (4) representatives of four Parties made statements.

2. These and/or other issues could potentially be raised under “other matters” of the SBI and SBSTA agendas if they fell within the mandate of the respective subsidiary body. If they do not, certain substantive issues may potentially be excluded from future deliberations under the UNFCCC.