Plastic-free planet: Geopolitics slows progress on Day 1 of Paris meet

The second meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-2) kicked off at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) headquarters in Paris, France.

There were several strong statements; however, geopolitics over electing representatives for the bureau slowed the agenda, leaving little time for discussing the draft rules.  

The President of the French Republic welcomed the delegations through a video message. “If we do nothing, the generation of plastic waste will triple again by 2060. Plastic pollution is, therefore, a time bomb as well as a scourge already present,” Emmanuel Macron said in his opening remarks.

He also called for ending the ‘unsustainable production’ of plastics.

Read more: Plastic-free planet: Evolution of Global Plastics Treaty

“We are gathered here in Paris because the linear plastics economy is gushing pollution galore, damaging the ecosystems, climate and health,” said Executive Director United Nations Environment Programme Inger Anderson. 

The Global Plastics Treaty could be a tool the world uses to close the plastic tap that is still wide open, she emphasised. “We cannot recycle our way out of this problem”, she said, stressing the need for reduction across the entire life cycle of plastics with transparency.

Executive secretary of INC, Jyoti Mathur Filipp, highlighted the “urgency to address plastic pollution continues to grow and the world’s eyes are on us, once again, to deliver without delay”. 

The opening session concluded on a high note with the hope for a strong, legally binding instrument across the life cycle of plastic.

Delay in draft rules discussions

The first agenda in the INC-2 was to elect a bureau — a body that guides the secretariat in organising the meetings of the INC. Every region must nominate two representatives to the bureau. 

All regions nominated and elected two representatives in INC-1 barring Eastern Europe. The region had self-nominations from 3 member states, Russia, Ukraine and Estonia. Ukraine withdrew their nomination in favour of Georgia on May 25 via a letter to the secretariat. 

Read more: Plastic-free planet: Negotiations on Global Plastics Treaty underway, the story so far

Various regions finalised the following names:

• African Group: Rwanda and Senegal 
• Asia and the Pacific Group: Japan and Jordan 
• Eastern European States: Georgia, Estonia and Russia 
• Latin America and Caribbean Group: Ecuador and Peru
• Western European group and other states: Sweden and the United States 
• Small Island Developing States: Antigua and Barbuda 

The Committee received an objection for one of the candidates from Western European and there were too many candidates in the Eastern European region. A secret ballot voting was held to elect the representatives for both regions. 

This decision was as per the draft rules of procedure agreed by the member states, which stated that the member states shall make every effort to agree by consensus. In response to Saudi Arabia’s objection to the voting system, the secretariat recalled election rules 45 and 47 of the draft rules of procedure. 

For instance, rule 47.2 stated, “If the number of candidates obtaining such a majority is more than the number of places to be filled, those candidates obtaining the largest number of votes shall be elected.”

The UNESCO headquarters is not equipped with an electronic voting system and a paper-based and time-consuming mechanism was followed for secret ballot voting.

The results were as follows:

Western European region

Eastern European region

Read more: Plastic-free planet: What CSE expects from Global Plastic Treaty negotiations — the issues & politics

The time-taking secret ballot voting pointed out the severe failure on the part of the Eastern European region in not being able to reach a consensus on the election of representatives. On the other hand, this could also be a strategy used by member states who want to slow down the process of negotiations.

A lot of time could be saved and used for discussing other agenda items, provided the regions put their differences aside and actually work towards developing a strong “legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution”.

Following this, there was little time left to discuss the draft rules of procedure by the member states.

Subscribe to Daily Newsletter :

SUPPORT US

We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.