| The EU must learn from the IWC voting shambles |
|
25 June 2010 | Press release The EU must urgently seek clarification from the European Court of Justice on voting procedures to prevent its influence being undermined in future international negotiations. The flawed compromise deal on Greenland’s whaling quotas reached at the International Whaling Commission negotiations allowed the EU to sidestep the critical issue of member states’ voting rights. Clarity must be achieved if the EU and its members are to operate effectively in environmental negotiations and represent Europe’s interests on the international stage. The International Whaling Commission voted yesterday for a proposal put forward by Denmark that will allow Greenland to hunt 9 humpback whales a year in exchange for reducing its catch of fin and minke whales. The vote today allows additional catches of humpback whales. While apparent concessions were made by reducing quotas of fin and minke whales, the new lower limits still exceed Greenland's current catches, in particular of fin whales, so no fewer animals will actually be caught. Earlier this week EU member states, together with a majority of IWC members, failed to reach agreement on a proposal that would have lifted the moratorium on commercial whaling in place since 1986. ClientEarth has worked closely with the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) and provided advice to the EU member states on the legalities of voting in international negotiations. Prior to the IWC negotiations the EU had threatened to issue an instruction to its member states to abstain from voting in the IWC negotiations. This could have opened the door for the introduction of whaling quotas for a whole range of whale species, effectively legitimising international commercial whaling. Despite concerns that the compromise deal that will allow Greenland to hunt humpbacks will lead to commercial trade in humpback meat within Greenland, the EU members of the IWC unanimously supported the compromise proposal. Sandy Luk, senior marine lawyer with ClientEarth, stated “The EU has avoided addressing issues relating to the position of member states in international negotiations by agreeing to a compromise deal that will effectively legitimise commercial whaling in Europe. Although we are pleased that the EU did not order its members to abstain, the EU has failed to resolve questions about the position of EU member states in international negotiations.” Sandy Luk continued “The best way to prevent these issues from undermining the EU’s position in international talks in future would be for a member state or the European Commission to request an opinion from the European Court of Justice clarifying member states’ positions in international environmental negotiations. We hope the EU will learn from the experience of the IWC negotiations. Issues relating to voting must not be allowed to overshadow any further international negotiations on environmental issues. Any delay in resolving these issues risks undermining the EU’s international influence in environmental negotiations.” ENDS For more information please contact: Mike Haines Communications officer This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it +44 (0)207 749 5978 +44 (0)7538 418 460 |
