CITES CoP16 Digest - Species Survival Network

DOCUMENT BACKGROUND / CURRENT STATUS EFFECT OF DOCUMENT SSN VIEW
60
35. Improving the efficiency
of international
cooperation on
permit and certificate
verification
Cop16 Doc. 35
• Regarding permit verification, RC 12.3 (Rev. CoP15)
on Permits and certificates recommends that Parties:
• verify permit authenticity whenever irregularities
are suspected;
• check with Secretariat when they have serious
doubts about validity of permits; and
• check the e-mails and telefaxes they receive confirming
the validity of permits, in order to ensure
that information that appears on them, including
the numbers, corresponds to that in the CITES
Directory.
• Prepared by China.
• Proposes adoption of a Resolution recommending,
inter alia, that:
• Parties take all possible measures to prevent falsification
of export permits or certificates;
• Parties respond to a request from another Party
to verify a permit or certificate within ten working
days and, if not possible, indicate, within ten days,
a date when information will be provided (not to
exceed 30 working days from request);
• if the Party fails to respond, that the requesting
Party not accept the permit; and
• Secretariat assist Parties with permit and certificate
verification, bring to attention of SC repeated failure
of a Party to verify permits or certificates; and bring
to attention of Parties any increasing trend in use of
fraudulent permits or certificates for a species.
SUPPORT
• SSN urges Parties to support this practical proposal which
will improve implementation and enforcement of the
Convention.
36. Decision-making
mechanism for a
process of trade in ivory
Cop16 Doc. 36
• Decision 14.77 directs SC to propose for approval by
CoP16 “a decision-making mechanism for a process
of trade in ivory under the auspices of the Conference
of the Parties.”
• SC57 approved commissioning an independent study
on the Decision-Making Mechanism (DMM) to be
conducted; a draft report (in English only) was distributed
to range States and stakeholders in March
2012 and the final report at SC62 (SC62 Doc. 46.4,
Annex).
• At SC62, several Parties expressed concern that:
lack of French translation had prevented feedback
from all range States, the report did not meet the
terms of reference (ToR), the mechanism proposed
was not consistent with their interpretation of what
a DMM should be as per Decision 14.77, and that
Decision 14.77 needed to be extended and clarified
accordingly.
• SC62 directed Secretariat to produce a report with
recommendations for CoP16 after seeking further
stakeholders’ comments on the draft report, and to
consult stakeholders on production of this document
in English and in French.
• States that principal aim of Decision 14.77 is to
establish a basis for agreeing upon how to make
decisions, under CITES, on:
• whether or not there should be international trade
in elephant ivory,
• the circumstances under which such trade could
take place, and
• related institutional and financial arrangements.
• States that were such decisions made by the CoP,
“trade in ivory could take place under the auspices of
the SC in accordance with the criteria and conditions
of the agreed trade regime.”
• Proposes that the DMM could:
• clarify on what basis CoP could make a decision
authorizing commercial trade in ivory from
Appendix-II populations;
• specify conditions and criteria to be met for such
trade to take place;
• explain in detail the organization and management
of any future trade in ivory;
Continued
OPPOSE
• SSN strongly opposes restricting proposed WG to 10 range
States; all range States, as primary stakeholders, have a
fundamental interest in development of DMM, and any
process to implement Decision 14.77 should ensure their
full participation. SSN recommends that if a 10-range-
State WG is approved, it should report its findings to a
meeting of all range States; recommendations of this
meeting should then be reported to SC.
• SSN recommends that Parties not consider the consultant’s
report submitted to SC62 as a resource the WG
should take into consideration. SSN agrees with views
expressed by several Parties at SC62 and throughout
the consultation process that the report disregarded the
agreed ToR, and that it should not serve as a basis for
developing any future DMM.
• SSN recommends that Parties reject the requirement
that the DMM should “explain in detail the organization
and management of any future trade in ivory” or should
decide on “the institutional and financial arrangements”
for ivory trade. SSN believes that in adopting Decision
14.77, Parties intended the DMM not to be a mechanism
for the regulation of a future ivory trade, but a process for
deciding whether such trade could take place.
Continued