Thread by @LossandDamage

1/28. A serious issue has been bubbling under the surface at #COP27 and it's reaching boiling point as we near the final plenary: the importance of the Convention(@UNFCCC) and its ongoing role in @UN #ClimateChange negotiations. Here is why this is important for #LossAndDamage.🧵

2/28. In the informal stocktaking plenary last night, we heard many interventions from developing country Parties highlighting their concerns regarding efforts by developed country Parties to remove references to the principles of the Convention across all thematic areas.

3/28. Under the Convention, Parties agree to protect the climate system “on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC).” These are important agreed principles that must be preserved.

4/28. However, since the adoption of the #ParisAgreement there has been a consistent effort from many developed country Parties to leave the Convention in the past.

5/28. With Parties under pressure to reach a decision on #LossAndDamage funding arrangements this evening, we are at a critical moment for the future of the Convention. But let’s go back first and consider the history.

6/28. Although this discussion started in Paris, #COP18 in Doha established the role of the @UNFCCC vis-a-vis #LossAndDamage in paragraph 5 of decision 3/CP.18 to “promote the implementation of approaches to address #LossAndDamage” (note the focus on ADDRESS).

7/28. See paragraph 5 of decision 3/CP.18 here:

🔗unfccc.int/resource/docs/…

8/28. At #COP19 in Warsaw the Warsaw International Mechanism for #LossAndDamage (WIM) was established and it was decided that it would function under the guidance of, and be accountable to, the COP which would guide the implementation of its functions.

🔗unfccc.int/resource/docs/…

9/28. Then at #COP21 in #Paris in 2015, #LossAndDamage was recognised in the #ParisAgreement under a stand-alone article: Article 8.

🔗See Article 8 of the #ParisAgreement here: unfccc.int/sites/default/…

10/28. However, in paragraph 51 of decision 1/CP.21 which is the decision adopting the #ParisAgreement, Parties agreed “that Article 8 of the Agreement does not involve or provide a basis for any liability or compensation.”

🔗unfccc.int/resource/docs/…

11/28. When depositing their instruments of ratification of the #ParisAgreement, Several countries provided caveats such as #Nauru which declared that:

12/28. “Article 8 and decision 1/CP.21, paragraph 51 in no way limits the ability of Parties to UNFCCC or the Agreement to raise, discuss, or address any present or future concerns regarding the issues of liability and compensation.”

🔗treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDeta…

13/28. In Article 8.2 of the #ParisAgreement Parties also decided that the WIM “shall be subject to the authority and guidance” of the CMA.

14/28. Since that time, Parties have debated the governance of the WIM. This is a debate about whether the supreme bodies of both the Convention (COP) and the #ParisAgreement (CMA) governs the WIM or whether it is governed solely by the CMA.

15/28. The G77 and China’s position is that article 8.2 created a dual governance arrangement where the WIM operates under the guidance of both the COP and the CMA. The #US and other developed country Parties argue instead that the WIM is now solely governed by the CMA.

16/28. Although there are various technical arguments that have been advanced regarding the resolution of this issue, at its core this is a political dispute.

17/28. At #COP25 in 2019 the #US indicated that it would agree to joint governance of the WIM under both the CMA and the COP on the condition that the exclusion clause in paragraph 51 of decision 1/CP.21 was extended to the COP.

18/28. However, this proposal was rejected by developing countries and so it was never formally tabled.

🔗See more on this here: climatechangenews.com/2019/12/11/us-…

19/28. At #COP25, the WIM agenda decision was taken by the CMA with a footnote indicating that “discussions related to the governance of the WIM did not produce an outcome; this is without prejudice to the further reconsideration of this matter.”

20/28. At #COP26 at #COP27 a slightly different approach has been taken which in effect also kicks the can down the road.

🔗unfccc.int/sites/default/…

21/28. While much of the #COP26 decision text was the same in the #COP26 cover decision and the CMA cover decision, the paragraphs relating to finance for #LossAndDamage only appear under the CMA.

🔗unfccc.int/sites/default/…

🔗unfccc.int/sites/default/…

22/28. The decision to establish the #GlasgowDialogue to discuss arrangements for funding to address #LossAndDamage is only included in the CMA decision.

23/28. This limits the scope of that discussion and its ability to result in the establishment of an operating entity ( be it a #LossAndDamage fund or facility) under the Financial Mechanism of the @UNFCCC because this is only possible under the COP.

24/28. What is concerning is that at #COP27 we have seen harder lines from developed country Parties on references to the Convention and its principles. This issue arose in the negotiations on the funding arrangements agenda item before the COP started.

25/28. Again, we saw this issue in the #SantiagoNetwork as Parties could not agree to text in the preamble referencing the principles of the Convention.

26/28.Then Parties had a consultation with the #COP27 Presidency where they agreed to defer the issue in the context of the WIM to #COP28 because no compromise could be reached.

27/28. Consultations at governance will continue next year but as discussions go into the evening tonight at #COP27 please keep in mind there can be no #ClimateJustice if we shift #LossAndDamage to solely under the CMA.

28/28. 📜Find out more about #LossAndDamage at #COP27 below:

🚨Live doc with the latest on L&D: docs.google.com/document/d/1Q9…

📸#LossAndDamage cheat sheet for journalists: docs.google.com/document/d/1aO…

🧑‍🎓And learn more about #LossAndDamage here: lossanddamagecollaboration.org/whatislossandd…