Another Tsunami Sweeps Sri Lanka

The Wickremesinghe government was unnerved by the huge attendance at NPP public rallies.

By Neville de Silva
LONDON, Dec 6 2024 – On 26 December 2004 a powerful Asian tsunami swept over many of Sri Lanka’s coastal provinces, killing thousands of people and wildlife, devastating habitats and even washing away a trainload of passengers far from the rail tracks.

Almost 20 years later, on November 14 this year, another tsunami struck, sweeping across the country in an unprecedented wave that mesmerised many of the 22 million population.

But this was a tsunami of a different kind. It took much of the nation by surprise, causing a tectonic shift in the country’s post-independence political landscape and traditional ways of governance as it dispensed with the corrupt old guard.

The November 14 parliamentary election uprooted the long surviving ruling class and the comprador capitalism of the old political parties that had dominated Sri Lanka’s politics since independence in 1948.

If the 2004 tsunami was geological and physical in nature, and the damage it wreaked was within the country, this one was essentially political and its impact was felt not only in neighbouring nations but far beyond, particularly in the western world, though for different reasons.

November’s election was won by a political alliance formed just a few years earlier, which swept aside Sri Lanka’s major parties that had dominated politics for over 60 years. And on its way to gaining power, it made history.

MAN OF THE SOIL: Anura Kumara Dissanayake

This is not only because the alliance won 159 seats, an unprecedented majority of over two-thirds of the seats in a 225-member legislature – the first time this has happened since the introduction of proportional representation decades ago.

Nor is it because it won 21 of the country’s 22 district constituencies; nor even because it was the first Sinhala-Buddhist party from the country’s south to win parliamentary seats in the predominantly minority-Tamil constituencies in the north, including the Tamil heartland of Jaffna, the east and the mainly Tamil plantation areas in the central hills, defeating long-established Tamil political parties that perpetuated Tamil nationalist politics.

This nascent election king-maker that made political history in November was a Left-leaning alliance of small political parties, trade unions, civil society organisations and activists named the National People’s Power (NPP). It threatened to oust the decaying and corruption-ridden politics of the past and implant an entirely new political and governance system.

Today, for the first time in its history, Sri Lanka has a government led solely by a Leftist alliance.

The NPP that emerged as a political party in 2019, led by Anura Kumara Dissanayake, (popularly called AKD), a member of one-time Marxist party Janata Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP- People’s Liberation Front), which he had joined as a student, contested the presidential election that year but gained a paltry 3 per cent of the vote. The following year, the NPP managed to scrape together 3 seats in the 225-member legislature.

It was scornfully named by its rightist parliamentary opponents and critics as ‘3 per cent’ for its poor electoral showing at both elections, which swept the Rajapaksa clan into power, the country’s most powerful political family, with one sibling as president, another as prime minister and still another as finance minister.

Yet in a remarkable change of events that shook the country’s political establishment, a party that only five years earlier had been derided and dismissed as a minor nuisance has risen to the pinnacle of power.

The NPP’s opponents label them as violent Marxists

Its capturing of executive and legislative power with relative ease in an unforeseen peaceful democratic transformation has resonated in nearby countries, some of which face civil turmoil and upheavals at home.

It is this transmogrification of an alliance virtually discarded by voters five years earlier as a political nonentity which has reduced to virtually zero long surviving parties with seasoned leaders and politicians. When the nation awoke the next morning to the news, it seemed like a fairytale.

But history intervened between the elections of 2019 and 2024. This helped the NPP’s slowly gathering public support to transform the one-time Marxist party into a democratic socialist progressive political entity, despite the fact that the earlier JVP had been involved in armed insurrections, the second in the late 1980s, which was virtually forced on it by a pro-western rightist government determined to crush democratic dissent.

Although the JVP was the hardcore party at the centre of the now emerging NPP led by Dissanayake, a progressive socialist determined to transform Sri Lanka into a people-centred democracy, 20-odd other organisations that formed the NPP were more inclined to follow the Dissanayake ideology.

In 2022, public protests against the then Gotabaya Rajapaksa presidency began to spread, due to his unbelievably incongruous and inconceivable policies, which led to shortages of food and domestic essentials like fuel. Mass protests erupted in Colombo and protestors camped opposite the presidential secretariat in their thousands for months.

It was a grand opportunity for the progressive democratic NPP, which has been calling for the abolition of the executive presidency and a return to the parliamentary system, to join the ‘Aragalaya’ protest movement and establish its credentials as a people’s movement determined to dispel the old order and build a new Sri Lanka.

Unable to quell the public protests, President Rajapaksa fled the country, having earlier appointed a political opponent but still one of the ruling class, Ranil Wickremesinghe, as prime minister. Wickremesinghe was later elected president by the Rajapaksa-family led parliamentary majority, as the constitution allowed it.

Wickremesinghe’s high-handed policies, backed by the military and police to crush public dissent, and his deal with the IMF that led to more austerity and increasing poverty, promising economic prosperity only in future years, drove the people increasingly to oppose his policies and authoritarianism.

Hailing from a remote village in rural Sri Lanka and from a poor family living in a hamlet, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, like many of his comrades from the JVP and later the NPP, is a genuine man of the soil, the first such leader Sri Lanka has ever had.

Having struggled to educate himself in village schools and later at a provincial government school, AKD nevertheless managed to enter university and graduated with a bachelor’s degree in physics – a rare achievement for a boy of his background.

Had President Wickremesinghe had an opportunity to postpone national elections, he would have done so, just as he did the local government elections during his interim presidency, fearing public defeat. But the constitution stood in his way.

Seeing the massive attendance at the NPP’s public rallies, the Wickremesinghe government, and others expecting victory at parliamentary elections, panicked. They started branding the NPP as Marxists and insurrectionists who had engaged in armed violence and were likely to do so again. They demonised the NPP and created a nightmare image of a country under an authoritarian regime.

But such attempts to scare-monger the Sri Lankan people and potential foreign investors failed, due to Sri Lanka’s important geopolitical position in the busy Indian Ocean.

Yet this has not stopped the NPP’s opponents labelling them as violent Marxists, even as they forget their own past running armed paramilitary groups responsible for the killing and torture of hundreds of civilians in the late 1980s.

Those who read some of the Indian media and western news reports will not forget how they came to name the NPP as the country’s Marxist government, and continue to do so. However, over 60 per cent of Sri Lankan voters turned their backs on these nightmare visions, whether they came from local political leaders and their loyal press, the Indian or western media, which was likely hoping for a return of pro-western politicians and the continuation of corrupt regimes.

They now fear that the NPP will pursue the corrupt and bring them to justice for robbing state assets, as it has promised to do.

While the NPP’s immediate priorities are to continue dealing with the IMF to rescue the economy and other domestic issues, foreign policy does not appear to be at the top of its list. But, caught between India and China as ever, major issues lie ahead in this regard, which the NPP cannot afford to ignore for long.

Neville de Silva is a veteran Sri Lankan journalist who held senior roles in Hong Kong at The Standard and worked in London for Gemini News Service. He has been a correspondent for the foreign media including the New York Times and Le Monde. More recently he was Sri Lanka’s Deputy High Commissioner in London

IPS UN Bureau

 


!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

UNCCD COP16 Raises Hopes for Ambitious Global Land Action

Announcement of Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh Drought Resilience Partnership Initiative. Photo credit: Anastasia Rodopoulou/IISD/ENB|

Announcement of Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh Drought Resilience Partnership Initiative. Credit: Anastasia Rodopoulou/IISD/ENB|

By Stella Paul
RIYADH & HYDERABAD, Dec 6 2024 – While many delegates at the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD COP16) hope that this could be the convention’s own Paris moment—referring to the historic Paris agreement inked by UNFCCC signatories—however, this hedges heavily on the UN parties’ seriousness to combat drought, desertification and land degradation.

UNCCD COP 16, themed “Our Land and Our Future,” is currently underway in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

One of the biggest expectations from the conference is a landmark decision on achieving a complete halt to land degradation by 2030. The other expectations are mobilizing enough resources to restore all degraded land and achieve total resilience against droughts.

Global Land Degradation at COP

Degradation affects 2 billion hectares of land globally. This is more than the total land area of Russia, the largest country on earth. This affects 3.2 billion people—twice the population of entire Africa. The degraded land area is also continuously expanding as each year an additional 100 million ha get degraded—mostly due to the impacts of climate change such as a drought and desertification. With a business-as-usual approach, by 2050, 6 billion ha will be degraded, warns UNCCD, which is urging the parties of the ongoing COP to take urgent action to halt this.

“Every second, somewhere in the world, we lose an equivalent of four football fields to land degradation. We must act now to restore our lands. They are the foundation of everything. For the first time, through our UNCCD reporting, we have evidence-based estimates of the alarming state of land degradation. COP16 is about our reliance on lands, but also our resilience,” said Ibrahim Thiaw, the Executive Secretary of UNCCD, at the opening ceremony of the COP.

“The scientific evidence is unambiguous: the way we manage our land today will directly determine our future on earth. Land restoration is the first and foremost foundation of our economy, security and humanity. We must restore our land now,” Thiaw said to an audience of party delegates, civil society groups, women’s rights organizations, business and finance experts, members of other UN agencies and youths.

Responding to the UN call, Saudi Arabia, the COP16 host, has promised to deliver strong action.

On Wednesday, December 4, the COP observed “Land Day.” Speaking at the event, Abdulrahman Abdulmohsen AlFadley, UNCCD COP16 President and Saudi Arabia Minister of Environment, Water, and Agriculture, said, “Through our Presidency of COP16, we will work to make this COP a launchpad to strengthen public and private partnerships and create a roadmap to rehabilitate 1.5 billion hectares of land by 2030.”

Finance Gap: Common Challenges of all UN COPs

On Dec 3, the second day of COP, the UNCCD released its financial needs assessment report, detailing the latest funding requirements to address land degradation, drought and desertification. The findings revealed a sizeable funding gap for international land restoration efforts. Based on UNCCD targets, the required annual investments for 2025–2030 are estimated at USD 355 billion. However, the projected investments for the same period amount to only USD 77 billion per year, leaving USD 278 billion that requires mobilization to meet the UNCCD objectives.

In the past, UNCCD’s finance mobilization efforts included the creation of a Land Degradation Neutrality Fund (LDN Fund), a financial mechanism to support the achievement of Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN)—a target under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 15.3). But, similar to the climate change COPs and the biodiversity COPs, UNCCD’s LDN fund is underfunded and has only received USD 208 million.

However, on the second day of COP16, the Arab Coordination Group pledged USD 10 billion to combat land degradation, desertification and drought. The donation would go to the Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership, an initiative launched by Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has also already announced a donation of USD 150 million to operationalize the initiative. The additional backing took place during the Ministerial Dialogue on Finance, part of the high-level segment at COP16 in Riyadh, aimed at unlocking international funding from the private and public sectors.

The Missing Private Sector Investment

The Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership will also focus on unlocking new financial mechanisms, such as credit, equity financing, insurance products, and grants, to enhance drought resilience.

With over USD 12 billion pledged for major land restoration and drought resilience initiatives in just the first two days, COP16 in Riyadh is already bringing more hopes than the biodiversity (UNCBD) and climate change (UNFCCC) COPs.

Dr. Osama Faqeeha, Deputy Minister for Environment, Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture, and Advisor to the UNCCD COP16 Presidency, said: “I hope this is just the beginning, and over the coming days and weeks, we see further contributions from international private and public sector partners that further amplify the impact of vital drought resilience and land restoration initiatives.”

However, the convention has still not been able to unlock any significant private funding, which has been identified by many as a huge challenge in the path of achieving total land restoration. According to the COP Presidency, only 6 percent of the private investors and businesses have invested in land-related initiatives and the funding gap in the UNCCD is a ‘worrying blackhole.”

“If the international community is to deliver land restoration at the scale required, then the private sector simply must ramp up investment. As the latest UNCCD findings show, there remains a worrying blackhole in the funds needed to combat land degradation, desertification and drought,” said Faqeeha.

A Gender-Just Financing Solution: Can COP16 Deliver?

Following a series of events this year at the UN General Assembly, the CBD COP16 in Cali, Colombia and COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the ‘Rio Convention Synergies’ dialogue also took place on Land Day, highlighting developments made during the 2024 Rio Trio events. The event discussed the interconnected issues driving land degradation, biodiversity loss and climate change and how to find common solutions.

Most participants highlighted the disproportionate impact of drought and land degradation on women and their urgent requirement for access to finance.

Women’s Leadership for Sustainable Land Management, Tarja Halonen, UNCCD Land Ambassador and Co-Chair of the UNCCD Gender Caucus, said, “Women and girls in rural communities bear the greatest burden of desertification, land degradation, and drought (DLDD), and their empowerment is crucial for addressing urgent land challenges.”

AlFadley noted that women’s empowerment enhances sustainable land management (SLM) and the preservation of ecosystems, as well as long-term resilience against DLDD.

Recognizing the challenges women face to mobilize resources for their own land restoration initiatives often due to lack of capacity and connections, Neema Lugangira, Member of Parliament, Tanzania, advised the COP16 Gender Caucus to connect with parliamentarians in the global climate finance chapter of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund’s parliamentary network.

“It will be good if the UNCCD can have a land restoration parliamentary group,” she said.

Speaking at a high-level interactive dialogue, Odontuya Saldan, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Mongolia, which will host COP17 in 2026, proposed establishing a global coalition of future rangelands and pastoralism solutions focused on gender equality and the role of youth, children, and women. She said Mongolia would make gender a priority at COP17, where the key theme will be rangelands and pastoralism.

What decisions COP16 makes to provide women land restorers and drought warriors with greater access to land finance is still up in the air.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 


!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

Zambia: Civil Society Fighting New Legislative Threats and Restrictive NGO Bills

Credit: Alex Berger in North Western Zambia

By Leah Mitaba and Bibbi Abruzzini
LUSAKA, Zambia, Dec 6 2024 – Over the past few years, new “tools of control” affecting the work of civil society organisations have multiplied, often imposing forms of “bureaucratic criminalisation” and “administrative harassment”. In particular, more and more restrictive and demanding laws are hurting civil society organisations’s capacity to operate across the globe.

2024 saw a new NGO Bill being proposed in Zambia. The proposed Bill seeks to introduce new regulations for the governance of civil society organisations. Under the bill, all NGOs would be required to re-register every five years and adhere to mandatory membership in a government-regulated central body. It also imposes stringent reporting requirements, including disclosure of activities, funding sources, and personal wealth declarations by NGO officials. Failure to comply with these provisions could result in severe penalties, including heavy fines and imprisonment.

“Placing the same onerous registration requirement on small Community Based Organisations in the provinces as their national well resource counterparts shows very weak understanding of the NGO landscape in Zambia. These requirements would wipe out scores of organisations who carry out vital grassroot work,” says Laura Miti, Executive Director at Alliance for Community Action.

Zambian CSOs warn that these measures, far from promoting accountability or transparency, represent an overreach by the state, placing undue burdens on organizations and jeopardizing their autonomy. If enacted, the NGO Bill could severely limit the ability of CSOs to operate independently, advocate for human rights, and support development initiatives across the country.

“The Non-Governmental Organisations Bill continues the trend by the government to oversee the work of civil society. Several provisions undermine the work that advocacy civil society organisations undertake. The Bill is not a result of consensus among civil society and between civil society and government. Civil society’s asks have not changed since the government began taking steps to enact legislation regulating the sector years ago. Yet, each time a Bill is shared, it does not reflect the aspirations of the sector and does not provide any protections an enabling legislation should,” says Josiah Kalala, Executive Director at Chapter One Foundation.

In a joint statement signed by platforms representing over 400 organizations, including the Zambia Council for Social Development (ZCSD), Transparency International, NGOCC, and the Civil Society for Poverty Reduction (CSPR), Zambian CSOs have highlighted the following critical issues with the proposed bill:

    · Overregulation and Intrusiveness: Provisions such as mandatory central membership and re-registration undermine the sector’s autonomy and self-regulation capabilities.
    · Punitive Measures: Disproportionate penalties for non-compliance, including imprisonment, create an environment of fear rather than collaboration.
    · Lack of Consultation: The bill was introduced without adequate stakeholder engagement, sidelining the voices of the very organizations it seeks to regulate.

Leah Mitaba, Executive Director of the Zambia Council for Social Development, underscores the need to have laws that promote collaboration and transparency, not control and coercion: “Zambia is a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights. These legal frameworks call on member states to avoid enacting laws that restrict civic space or hinder fundamental freedoms, including expression, association, and assembly. Unfortunately, the proposed 2024 Bill risks undermining these commitments. Therefore, the government’s decision to initiate consultations is a step in the right direction. It is hoped that this dialogue will lead to a self-regulatory framework that fosters the vibrancy and effectiveness of civil society organizations in Zambia.”

Additional concerns: cybersecurity and Anti-Terrorism legislation

In addition to the NGO Bill 2024, three new bills—the Cyber Security Bill 2024, Cyber Crimes Bill 2024, and Anti-Terrorism Bill—have been introduced and fast-tracked to parliament. While the stated objectives of these bills are to safeguard national security, combat cybercrime, and address terrorism, their provisions raise serious concerns about human rights, democratic governance, and constitutional compliance.

Key concerns raised by Zambian CSOs include:

    · Broad Surveillance Powers: The bills grant the government sweeping authority over digital infrastructure and allow for the interception of communications without sufficient safeguards, raising significant concerns about privacy and data protection.
    · Vague and Overbroad Definitions: Ambiguities in the language of the bills risk the criminalization of legitimate CSO activities, as well as broader civic engagement, advocacy, and free speech.
    · Continuity of Authoritarian Practices: CSOs have criticized the UPND administration for rushing the legislative process and sidelining public participation, echoing practices heavily condemned under the previous PF administration.

In a joint statement, Zambian CSOs called on Members of Parliament to reject these bills in their current forms and urged the United Party for National Development (UPND) administration to withdraw them for broader consultation and review. “Laws protecting Zambia’s security must also protect Zambia’s democracy and rights,” the statement emphasizes.

CSOs also highlighted that these laws, if enacted, would undermine constitutional protections and set a dangerous precedent for future legislation. They have appealed to Zambian citizens to demand accountability from their representatives, warning that these laws will shape the future of freedoms, privacy, and the ability to speak out in the country.

What do the bills mean for civil society?

The concerns raised by Zambian CSOs go beyond the immediate implications of the proposed bill. At stake is the broader enabling environment for civil society—a combination of legal, institutional, financial and social factors that allow CSOs to operate effectively and contribute meaningfully to development efforts and community support. This includes ensuring:

    · Protection of Fundamental Freedoms: Safeguarding the rights to freedom of association, expression, and assembly.
    · Access to Resources: Providing CSOs with the resources, capacities, tools and support they need to pursue their goals without undue restrictions.
    · Inclusive Decision-Making: Facilitating CSOs’ participation in shaping policies and the communities they represent.

“Many CSOs are caught in a web of increasingly complex regulations that limit their ability to operate freely. From endless bureaucratic delays to arbitrary decisions and denial of permits, these tactics slow civil society organisations down and drain their resources. Many are denied access to critical funding, while also facing stringent reporting requirements from donors, creating financial insecurity. This results in various forms of economic and emotional pressures,” said Forus director Sarah Strack in a recent article.

Next steps: what civil society is calling for

Zambian CSOs have consistently demonstrated their commitment to transparency and accountability through self-regulation initiatives. They have called on the government to build on these efforts rather than impose restrictive measures that could stifle civic engagement.

Zambian CSOs are calling on the government to demonstrate its commitment to democratic governance by:

    · Revisiting the Bills: Conduct an independent assessment of these laws to ensure compliance with constitutional standards and democratic principles.
    · Protecting the Environment of Civil Society Organisations: Ensuring that any regulatory measures enhance, rather than restrict, the ability of CSOs to carry out their work.
    · Supporting Self-Regulation: Building on existing self-regulation efforts to promote transparency and accountability within the sector.
    · Broaden Consultation: Engage with civil society, legal experts, and the public to develop balanced legislation that protects both national security and human rights.
    · Uphold Accountability: Recognize that legislative authority derives from the people and must reflect their needs and constitutional values.

With the UN Special Rapporteur visiting Zambia in January 2025 there is a call now to bring these issues to light and advocate for meaningful reforms. Zambia’s civil society calls on national and international partners to stand in solidarity with their efforts to protect the enabling environment.

Leah Mitaba Executive Director of the Zambia Council for Social Development and Bibbi Abruzzini Communications Coordinator at Forus.

IPS UN Bureau

 


!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

African Union, Nations Lay Bare Climate Vulnerabilities at UN’s Top Court

Submissions from Papua New Guinea laid bear the country's diversity and heightened vulnerability to climate change. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Submissions from Papua New Guinea laid bear the country’s diversity and heightened vulnerability to climate change. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

By Joyce Chimbi
THE HAGUE & NAIROBI, Dec 6 2024 – Kenya agrees with many UN member states testifying before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that the law of international responsibility should hold countries legally responsible for major damage to the global climate system.

“Responsible states must cease wrongful acts or remedy any omissions harmful to the climate system as well as make reparations for all damage caused by their breach. Such reparation may take the form of compensation for loss and damage. Of course, the court need not definitively pronounce on compensation in the context of historical omissions,” said Phoebe Okowa, a Kenyan lawyer and Professor of Public International Law.

“However, this is a precious opportunity to integrate the corpus juris (body of law) of climate change treaty law and customary international law, including the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, in a way that will assist states in establishing workable frameworks for compensation.”

Okowa was speaking on behalf of Kenya at the ICJ, which is one of 98 countries and 12 organizations participating in ongoing public hearings, contributing to the UN top court’s advisory opinion on the obligation of states to prevent climate change and ensure the protection of the environment for present and future generations.

The ongoing landmark climate change case dates to September 2021, when the Pacific Island of Vanuatu announced its intention to seek an advisory opinion from the ICJ. Vanuatu supported the efforts of a youth group—the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change—who were concerned about the vulnerability of small island developing states in the region to climate change.

Vanuatu then lobbied other countries to support this initiative and formed the core group of UN member states to take the initiative forward to the General Assembly.

In pursuit of this advisory, Ambassador Halima Mucheke on behalf of Kenya said the court “has had numerous participants stress the existential nature of the threat caused by climate change. In response, this court must bring clarity to the law, informed by the perspectives of developing states, particularly those in Africa, where temperatures are rising the fastest.”

“We believe that a clarification of the existing legal obligations will provide much-needed guidance to states, as well as the impetus for the next phase of political negotiations. Kenya specifically invites the court to draw on equitable principles reflected in climate change treaties, such as the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities,” she said.

Fred Sarufa, Permanent Representative of the Independent State of Papua New Guinea to the UN, said in the country’s nearly 50 years of nationhood, this was their first appearance before ICJ because climate change can no longer be ignored. He then proceeded to illustrate the significant issues at stake.

Prof. Phoebe Okowa invited the court to integrate the corpus juris of climate change treaty law towards a workable framework for compensation. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Prof. Phoebe Okowa invited the court to integrate the corpus juris of climate change treaty law towards a workable framework for compensation. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

“Papua New Guinea is home to and the custodian of a diverse geophysical and geomorphic landscape, including 20,197 kilometres of coastline, 40,000 square kilometres of coral reefs, one of the highest known levels of marine biological diversity in the world, around 10 percent of the world’s biodiversity in less than 1 percent of the world’s total land area, and the world’s third largest expanse of pristine tropical rainforest, covering 77.8 percent of our total land area,” Sarufa told the court.

Stressing that Papua New Guinea’s biodiversity is directly linked to its unsurpassed linguistic diversity, with over 850 spoken languages, the most in the world. Pila Niningi, the Minister for Justice and Attorney General of Papua New Guinea, discussed the numerous ways that climate change is wreaking havoc.

These include “forcing people to abandon their ancestral lands and territories, altered landscapes and seascapes, disrupted livelihoods, and led to civil unrest among traditional landowners, fighting over increasingly limited land and space. It has also endangered food crops, water and security, and the collapse of traditional and cultural practices and indigenous systems of governance,” Niningi said.

Rising seas have forced the islanders from northeast Bougainville and the people of Veraibari in the Gulf province of Papua New Guinea to abandon their ancestral lands because it engulfed their homes and schools and inundated what remains of the arable land.

This led Papua New Guinea to join other Pacific nations in adopting, within the framework of the Pacific Islands Forum, the Boe Declaration on Regional Security, which affirms, among others, that climate change remains the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security, and well-being of the peoples of the Pacific.

On her part, Kenya invited the court to confirm that significant financial assistance and technology transfer are binding legal obligations and not matters of discretion.

Professor Dr. Makane Moïse Mbengue from the African Union told the Court the matter on hand was about climate justice, as “climate change is a phenomenon that has not been caused by all states equally, and nor will all states suffer its effects equally.”

He emphasized that science serves as the cornerstone of climate justice for states, peoples, and individuals affected by climate change, underscoring the necessity of protecting the climate system and demanding responsibility from states that have caused harm to it. In this context, he said the African Union welcomes the court’s engagement with experts from the IPCC prior to the commencement of the hearings.

“The African Union notes efforts of certain states, albeit a minority, to negate science and trivialize the ordinary meaning of the terms of the request (for an advisory opinion). Their repeated calls for undue caution now, and in their written submissions, are transparent attempts to dilute the very object of the present proceedings. The African Union respectfully urges the court to dismiss these unfounded arguments,” he observed.

Further inviting the court to “reject the flawed argument, which was repeated again this week, that the relevant obligations are reduced solely to the so-called specialists of the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. The same arguments were tried, tested, and defeated before they lost. Nonetheless, they should find no fertile ground before the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, whose advisory opinions have consistently contributed to maintaining the systemic coherence of the international legal system.”

Mbengue said that if the court didn’t say who was responsible, it would be the same as a situation of non-liquet, which means there is no law that applies, and states would be free to keep damaging the climate system. Such an outcome could hardly have been the intention of the General Assembly in seeking this advisory opinion.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 


!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);