中国气候变化信息网 China Climate Change Info-Net

Current Location:Home > Statements & Speeches
Submission of China on the Expedited Procedures for Reinstatement of Eligibility of a Party included in Annex I to use the mechanisms Established under Articles 6, 12 and 17 of the Kyoto Protocol

Submission of China
on the Expedited Procedures for Reinstatement of Eligibility
of a Party included in Annex I to use the mechanisms
Established under Articles 6, 12 and 17 of the Kyoto Protocol

March 11, 2002

 

In accordance with paragraph 12 of Guidelines for review under Article 8 of the Kyoto Protocol (FCCC/CP/2001/L.29)(hereafter refers to the Guidelines), China hereby submits the following views to the Secretariat of UNFCCC on the expedited procedures for reinstatement of eligibility of a Party included in Annex I to use the mechanisms established under Articles 6, 12 and 17 of the Kyoto Protocol. For all views submitted, China holds the right to amend at any time following the submission.

1. Expert review team for reinstatement of eligibility

The review for reinstatement of eligibility shall be organized objectively and transparently, since both suspension and reinstatement of eligibility to use the mechanisms directly touches such matter that a Party concerned is not in compliance with relevant Articles of the Kyoto Protocol. For this purpose, any member of expert review team whose review report indicated that a Party included in Annex I failed to meet eligibility requirements under Article 6, 12 and 17, shall be no longer a member of expert review team for reinstatement of eligibility. The expert review team for reinstatement of eligibility shall be reorganized and its composition shall be determined in accordance with the principle of the five regional groups of the United Nations.

2. Time frames of the review for reinstatement of eligibility

In determination of time frames of the review for reinstatement of eligibility, some critical elements shall be considered, such as:

First, the actual timing of review for reinstatement of eligibility may vary by the causes which lead to suspension of an Annex I Party's eligibility to use the mechanisms. Accordingly, the time frames of the review for reinstatement of eligibility shall be set up practically. For those technical-oriented causes such as problems in relation with adjustment of greenhouse gas emissions under Article 5, paragraph 2, and establishment of Assigned Amount under Article 7, paragraph 4, for example, it is hard for expert review team to complete review in such a short time set in the Appendix II to the Guidelines, in accordance with the relevant provisions of Part II, III, IV of the Guidelines in which a year period is allowed for reviews in normal case.

Second, the determination of the time frames shall fully consider the varied capabilities by Parties to submit information requested and to comment upon the expedited draft review report made by expert review team.

Third, the determination of the time frames shall also give a full consideration to the balance of two approaches, in terms of their time frames and the favor by user, to reinstatement of eligibility stipulated in the COP Draft decision: Procedures and Mechanisms relating to Compliance under the Kyoto Protocol (FCCC/CP/2001/L.21). Section X, paragraph 2 in the Draft decision says: "Where the eligibility of a Party included in Annex I under Articles 6,12 and 17 of the Protocol has been suspended under section XV, paragraph 4, the Party concerned may submit a request or reinstate its eligibility, either through an expert review team or directly to the enforcement branch." For the approach of directly to the enforcement branch, the expedited procedures shall be completed in 14 weeks around in according with the relevant provisions of the Draft decision. Therefore, the time frames for the approach of through an expert review team shall keep close to that set in the approach of directly to the enforcement branch, from legal point of view. Otherwise, an approach of two options might loose its necessity of existing and its possibility and favor applied.

3. Relationship of expedited final review report and enforcement branch

It shall be clarified in relevant section of the Guideline that an expedited final review completed by expert review team for reinstatement of eligibility shall be, through secretariat, submitted to enforcement branch for final decision-making about reinstatement of eligibility.

4. Review for the expedited procedures for reinstatement of eligibility

Up to date, no relevant experience has been available for reference to establishment of the expedited procedures for reinstatement of eligibility of a Party included in Annex I to use the mechanisms established under Articles 6, 12 and 17 of the Kyoto Protocol. In this sense, the expedited procedures for reinstatement of eligibility in the Guidelines, which is in discussion, needs to be reviewed in certain time after it would be implemented.


Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China

Date:Mar 11,2002