UNDRIP Report - English FINAL - International Forum on Globalization

countries Norway will be working together with on
possible projects.
Lahn added that they have been asking the
government to adopt a rights-based approach
through broad participatory processes. “The
[Norwegian] government is supporting a need to
base a mechanism not only on carbon but also on the
needs and rights of local peoples, of indigenous
peoples, and also on biodiversity concerns,” he
explained.
But when it comes to specific objectives that will be
measured, the focus so far has still been mostly on
reducing carbon. When they ask if Norway will
require participatory processes—the involvement of
indigenous peoples, or implementation of the
Declaration as a precondition for entering into an
agreement with a forest country—the government
says “Well, not necessarily a precondition—we do
not want conditionalities on their bilateral aid, but it
should be there and we want to work to ensure that
it should be there.” “But as long as they are not clear
that it should be a precondition, we are not sure how
this will play out,” Lahn said.
Lahn added that in the UNFCCC negotiations on the
future REDD mechanism, they are also asking
Norway to propose a reference to <strong>UNDRIP</strong> in the
text. However, according to Lahn, the government
responded by saying, “Well, this is difficult. We
support it, of course, but it will never be accepted by
the US or Canada, so there is no point in proposing
it.” This has led Lahn to feel that even though the
government of Norway is supporting the general
objectives and sharing the general objectives that we
have, they are somewhat reluctant to put pressure on
those things and push them along in the UNFCCC
process.
Lahn listed four things that are needed to make sure
that these funds are used in a way that can provide
some good examples for future REDD work:
1) Feedback from the countries Norway is talking to
about how the work in the possible recipient
countries is actually carried out. For example, are
indigenous peoples actually being consulted? How
are the recipient governments working on this? It is
very important to get this feedback.
2) Help in building alliances. If we can establish a
“G5” of countries that are referencing the Declaration
in the text of the UNFCCC, if we would help the
Norwegian government to build alliances with
countries that support indigenous rights, having
allies would make it easier for Norway also to push it
in the negotiations.
3) Concrete proposals on how to include indigenous
peoples at all the levels of the process. It is very
important that we ensure indigenous peoples’
participation in the UN REDD mechanism, which is
being set up right now. “I think that it is a very
important time to influence that, because we can help
shape it if we seize the moment right now,” Lahn
said.
4) Assurance of the same kind of participation on the
national level in the countries in the whole UNFCCC
process.
Lahn circulated the Norwegian government’s
background document on their initiative, which
explains its goals and objectives and includes a list of
people in the team that is working on this in the
Ministry of Environment. He said that they have an
NGO contact person, and that FOE-Norway has
asked them to treat the document not as finished but
as part of an open process, and they have agreed to
take into account any comments that would
forthcoming be on this. Lahn concluded by saying
that if anyone had any comments to make on the
Norwegian government’s background document,
they could, and should, provide them directly to the
government.
Roman Czebiniak of Greenpeace <strong>International</strong>
began his presentation by drawing a diagram to
represent the organization. According to Czebiniak,
Greenpeace <strong>International</strong> does not take any money
from governments, does not take any money from
corporations, does not own any lands, and does not
buy any forests. “So if we are wrong on an issue, it is
because we are just wrong,” said Czebiniak.
He then explained how the decisions that would be
made before the end of 2009 in Copenhagen would
impact indigneous peoples’ land. He made what he
called a “little plea” to the group, stating “we need to
have the ability to consult with forest peoples, to
strategize together, and to have an impact at these
negotiations, and between these negotiations to meet
with governments and to push [the peoples’] issues.”
In his drawing, Czebiniak illustrated how about
sixty-five percent of emissions come from energy and
43