Search Climate Insights Directory

The Global Campaign criticizes the August 2020 draft of the UN legally binding instrument on transnational corporations, arguing it has 'lost its soul' by diluting its scope and failing to include critical protections for human rights and accountability for global value chains.

The document provides a detailed update on the WTO negotiations to discipline fisheries subsidies, focusing on three main pillars: illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing; overexploited stocks; and overcapacity and overfishing. It examines the proposed legal frameworks, the role of Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT) for developing nations, and institutional questions regarding transparency, dispute settlement, and the legal form of the eventual instrument.

The author contends that the world's failure to prepare for the coronavirus pandemic demonstrates a need for a dedicated international organization to treat pandemics as global security problems. This proposed institution would be a public-private enterprise featuring a Scientific Advisory Board, a 24/7 Situation Centre, and Rapid Response Assistance Teams. The author suggests using the Biological Weapons Convention as a legal framework and proposes that a coalition including the European Union, ASEAN, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia could provide the necessary leadership to establish the body.

CIEL announced the temporary closure of its Washington, DC, and Geneva offices and the suspension of in-person meetings and travel due to COVID-19. Despite these operational changes, the organization committed to holding corporations and governments accountable for environmental destruction, protecting human rights in pandemic responses, ensuring future solutions avoid past problems, and maintaining the inclusion of marginalized communities in virtual spaces.

The document outlines the mechanisms of the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies (HRTBs) and provides a strategic guide for climate advocates to engage in the State reporting process. It highlights the benefits of securing non-binding but authoritative 'Concluding Observations' to pressure states, provides examples of successful interventions in countries like Argentina and Norway, and details the five-step reporting cycle from initial submission to national follow-up.

The document outlines the mechanisms of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) and provides a strategic framework for climate activists to influence state climate policies. It details the reporting cycle, the role of 'shadow reports' submitted by civil society, and the subsequent 'Concluding Observations' (COBs) issued by committees. While COBs are not legally binding, the guide argues they serve as authoritative guidance that can be leveraged in national advocacy, media campaigns, and litigation. It provides specific examples of recommendations made to countries like Argentina, Norway, and Spain regarding fossil fuels and air pollution.

The report traces the evolution of e-commerce governance at the WTO from the 1998 work programme to the 2017 Joint Statement Initiative (JSI). It examines how existing WTO agreements like GATS and TRIPS apply to digital trade and details the ongoing negotiations among 83 members. Key challenges identified include the digital divide between developed and developing nations, disagreements over data flows and localization, and the lack of a consensus on whether to create new rules or revise existing ones.

The document traces the evolution of e-commerce in the WTO from the 1998 Work Programme to the 2017 Joint Statement Initiative (JSI). It analyzes how existing WTO rules like GATS and TRIPS apply to digital trade and details the ongoing negotiations among 83 members. Key challenges identified include the digital divide between developed and developing nations, disagreements over data flows and localization, and the lack of consensus on whether to create new rules or revise existing ones.

The report analyzes the failure of diplomatic efforts in Syria, including the Geneva and Astana processes, and maps the fragmented nature of the Syrian Sunni opposition. It details how external actors—primarily Russia, Turkey, and Iran—have established spheres of influence and proxy networks that complicate a sustainable political transition. The authors argue that the peace process has been largely detached from the Syrian people, exacerbated by the rise of extremist groups, the Kurdish issue, and a severe economic crisis compounded by COVID-19.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International asserts that systemic crises in climate and biodiversity are driven by a model that privileges transnational corporate profits over human rights and the environment. It advocates for a legally binding international instrument to hold these corporations accountable, proposing seven specific demands including the creation of an International Court for transnational corporations and the legal primacy of human rights over investment agreements.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International asserts that climate and biodiversity crises are driven by a corporate system that prioritizes profit over human rights and the environment. It advocates for a systemic shift toward societies based on sovereignty and justice, specifically calling for a legally binding UN treaty to hold transnational corporations accountable. The document outlines seven key demands for the treaty, including the establishment of an international court for transnationals, the primacy of human rights over trade agreements, and the inclusion of global value chains in the treaty's scope.

Friends of the Earth International calls for a systemic shift away from a profit-driven model that causes climate and biodiversity crises. The statement advocates for a legally binding UN treaty on transnational corporations and human rights, outlining seven specific demands to ensure corporate accountability, the primacy of human rights over trade agreements, and the establishment of an international tribunal for multinationals.

Friends of the Earth International expresses deep disappointment with the revised text of the UN's proposed binding treaty on transnational corporations. The organization argues that by expanding the scope to all companies rather than focusing on transnational corporations, the text ignores the power structures of parent companies and their supply chains. While acknowledging the inclusion of victims' rights, the group contends the document lacks international mechanisms to hold corporations accountable and fails to establish the supremacy of human rights over trade and investment agreements.

Friends of the Earth International expresses deep frustration with the July 16, 2019, Revised Draft of the UN Binding Treaty, claiming it dilutes the scope of the instrument by shifting focus from transnational corporations to all business activities. While the organization acknowledges the integration of victims' rights and human rights coverage, it argues the draft only sets obligations for States and fails to create international jurisdiction or direct obligations for corporations. The organization calls for a more ambitious text ahead of the October 2019 IGWG session to end corporate impunity and prioritize human rights over profit.

Friends of the Earth International expresses frustration with the Revised Draft of the UN's legally binding instrument for regulating transnational corporations, claiming it dilutes the focus on transnational entities and fails to establish direct corporate obligations, instead placing responsibility solely on States.

The document serves as a guide for citizens, NGOs, and legal professionals to navigate the complex system of environmental litigation in Germany. It details the three pillars of the Aarhus Convention—access to information, public participation, and access to justice—and explains how these are implemented through EU directives and German national law. The toolkit outlines specific procedures for challenging government inaction or illegal acts, the standing of recognized environmental associations, and the roles of international bodies like the European Court of Justice (ECJ), the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC), and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) argues that the Zero Draft presented by the IGWG is too weak and fails to establish a robust mechanism to end the impunity of transnational corporations. The organization advocates for the primacy of human rights over trade and investment agreements, the establishment of an international tribunal for TNCs, and the inclusion of direct legal obligations for corporations rather than relying on voluntary principles or state-centric responsibilities. FoEI also criticizes the European Union for its lack of constructive participation and for favoring corporate interests over human rights.

The author contends that the current global development model, which prioritizes infrastructure and economic growth, increases disaster risk and must be transformed. Citing the IPCC 1.5°C report and the Sendai Framework, the text emphasizes that sustainable development must address underlying causes such as poverty and inequality. It calls for the 2019 Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction to move beyond boardroom discussions and actively incorporate the knowledge of frontline communities and the energized public sector to create inclusive, resilient transformations.

The project aimed to address knowledge gaps regarding consumer food waste by leveraging citizen science to gain insights into behaviors and decision-making. Key activities included a literature review, the identification of network members, and a workshop in Geneva on 6 June. The resulting network connects researchers, experts, and practitioners to foster collaborative research proposals.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International argues that the European Union is delaying and undermining the UN process to establish a legally binding treaty for transnational corporations. While civil society and many Global South nations support the treaty to end corporate impunity for human rights and environmental abuses, the EU has historically opposed the resolution and recently sought to restrict the intergovernmental working group's mandate. The author advocates for a 'Zero Draft' that includes civil and criminal liability for companies, supply chain transparency, and the primacy of human rights over trade agreements.