In light of the decision taken in Paris, what would be the core elements (e.g., triggers, consequences) of the most robust mechanism possible under Art 15 of the Paris Agreement? Advice: Background Under international treaty law, the primary dispute resolution / compliance tool is ordinarily an ability for a party to a treaty to refer […]
Blog Archives
What are the legal implications of using the term “committee” or “mechanism” for the compliance section of the Paris Agreement? Is one term necessarily broader than the other? Summary: The answers to these questions are based on the review of several international environmental agreements and other related instruments. We also …
The Co-Chairs of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP) have just issued a revised document. It contains sections on mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology transfer and capacity building. The new ‘Draft Agreement’ comprises 26 articles on 9 pages that cover all the areas under negotiations. However, many …
During the negotiating session in Bonn in June 2010, the AWG-KP requested the Secretariat’s legal service to prepare a paper on how to avoid a gap between the first and second commitment periods and to identify the legal consequences of any such gap. The formal request is as follows: “In the context of decision 1/CMP.1 […]
In this briefing paper, we are set out an analysis of the following question: What sanctions/penalties exist in other environmental treaties (e.g. CITIES, CBD, Montreal Protocol)? Without commenting on the merits of such sanctions/penalties, would any of these be compatible with the Convention or the current LCA text.