Uncategorized

Thousands march in hundreds of cities worldwide demanding international financial overhaul ahead of UN finance conference

June 27, 2025

PRESS RELEASE

Thousands around the world are holding mobilizations in time for the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4), a once-in-a-decade gathering of governments held under the auspices of the United Nations to agree on international responses to urgent finance issues. Movements, civil society groups, communities and publics are mobilizing in 41 countries, in 149 cities, towns, and districts from June 27th to June 29th.

The global actions are calling for a transformation of the international financial system, as well as immediate demands such as debt cancellation, wealth taxes, and the delivery of climate finance. Movements and civil society groups are challenging Global North governments and the UN system to take the lead in bridging the development and climate finance gap, estimated to be in the trillions. A core part of this is financial reparations for historical and continuing injustices inflicted by the Global North on the peoples of the Global South.

According to Jean Saldanha, director of EURODAD: “The global financial architecture is dominated by rich countries and not responsive to the needs and priorities of the global south. It is in the interest of all of us, in the global south and north, to build a Financing for Development system that reduces inequality, provides stability and ensures adequate public finance for climate change. Yet the global north has chosen to defend an unjust status quo instead of seizing this opportunity to advance essential reforms that would give the global south a seat at the decision-making table. We in civil society will continue to demand this reform, before, in and after Sevilla.”

Civil society organizations and movements are reiterating the urgent demand for debt cancellation and calling for a UN Framework Convention on Debt Convention to pave the way for a democratic, multilateral and transparent mechanism to address unsustainable and illegitimate debt. They assert that it is vital to move away from creditor-dominated forums that have failed to prevent and resolve the accumulation of unsustainable and illegitimate debts, and have resulted in debt relief schemes that protect creditor interests.  In 2022, developing countries paid USD 49 billion more to their external creditors than they received in fresh disbursements. 

UN Member States are also being challenged by civil society to support and ensure a robust outcome from the negotiations for the ​​UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, in order to effectively address international tax abuse, avoidance and evasion especially by multinational corporations and elites, which are resulting in losses in public revenues of at least USD 492 billion a year. Similarly, there is strong clamor for wealth taxes to help mobilize the trillions needed for sustainable development and climate action. 

Dereje Alemayehu, executive coordinator of Global Alliance for Tax Justice, said: “The international tax system is broken. Developed by the ‘rich countries’ club’ of the OECD, it has failed to deliver the resources urgently needed for public services, development, human rights, gender equality, and climate justice. Tax abuse by the rich and multinational corporations has instead taken these resources, deepening the debt crisis faced by so many of our countries. Now, a historic process is underway as countries will meet in August to begin negotiations on a UN Tax Convention. We expect all UN Member States to negotiate in good faith to deliver a robust Framework Convention and two early protocols.”

In addition to debt service payments and tax abuse, developing countries’ public coffers are being depleted by climate disasters. Developed countries that have historically caused the climate crisis are legally obligated by the UN Climate Convention to cover the costs of climate mitigation, adaptation, loss and damage and just transition in developing countries. Although developed countries have long claimed that they lack the public funds for climate finance, research has shown they can raise trillions by taxing polluters and profiteers, redirecting fossil fuel subsidies, and redistributing even just a fraction of their enormous military budgets. Civil society organizations and climate activities emphasize that climate finance must be delivered in the form of public, predictable, grants-based finance, instead of loans that will only exacerbate the already unsustainable debt crises in the developing world.

Tasneem Essop, executive director of Climate Action Network International, said: “The world is on fire – and the systems meant to protect us are feeding the flames. The intersecting crises of debt, climate collapse, and inequality are not abstractions — they are lived realities for people in the Global South, every single day. While governments dither and elites profit, it’s up to us to raise the alarm and demand justice. We will not stand by while wealth is siphoned from our communities, our land, our labour, to line the pockets of corporations and the ultra-rich. We will not be silenced.”

Aid cuts recently announced by the US, UK, and other Global North governments will also make it much harder for developing countries to address immediate financial needs arising from the multiple crises and undertake systems wide changes for a rapid, equitable and just transition to sustainable and climate resilient societies. Civil society groups are denouncing the cuts and asserting that aid must not be seen as charity but rather part of the reparations owed to the South. 

Lidy Nacpil, the coordinator of the Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development, said: “What our world needs is a massive transfer of resources from North to South, as part of the reparations we are owed for historical injustice. For centuries, the people of the Global South have been exploited and our natural resources have been plundered–all to enrich the elites and governments of the Global North. Their enormous wealth was accumulated at the expense of our people and planet, and it is past time for them to pay up for the damage they’ve done.”

The different protest actions denounce the Global North governments for spending trillions on subsidies for fossil fuels, on wars and genocide, on militarization and domestic authoritarian operations while failing to deliver their financial obligations.

Bronwen Tucker, public finance lead of Oil Change International, said: “We’re facing record-breaking cost-of-living, record-breaking fossil fuel production, and a record-breaking debt crisis. These problems are connected. They are all driven by a financial system that is catering to a tiny number of billionaires and CEOs. The only thing that can stop this is record-breaking people power. That is why we are on the streets today. At the last Financing for Development a decade ago, a UN Convention to rewrite tax rules was rejected, but now it has been won because of persistence from Global South governments and civil society. A UN Convention on debt is next. It’s incredibly shortsighted for the EU, Canada, Japan, and UK to be blocking this.”

Civil society has called for wider social transformation and a just transition to new modes of production, distribution, and consumption that prioritize peoples’ needs over profit. To achieve this, the inequitable economic and political relations between countries must change, and the institutions that control global economic and financial governance must be transformed.

MORE QUOTES HERE:

Patricia Miranda, global advocacy director of LATINDADD (Latin American Network for Economic, Social and Climate Justice): “Debt is the greatest challenge for the Fourth Financing for Development Conference. As we face a new debt crisis trapped in a system that concentrates power in few hands, it is urgent to initiate real reform and lay the foundations for truly democratic governance. A UN Convention on Sovereign Debt, in which all countries have a voice, can deliver fair, sustainable and equitable solutions for all.”

Jenny Ricks, general secretary of Fight Inequality Alliance: “We are living in the era of the billionaire, but this is also a time of a debt crisis. Across the Global South, people are not waiting for summits to create a just world — we are on the streets to demand it. Governments need to hear the urgent cries for systemic changes like debt cancellation and taxes on the super rich, not cosmetic tweaks.”

Ingo Ritz, director of Global Call to Action Against Poverty: “As a European I am ashamed. In the FfD4 negotiations the EU – together with other rich countries – blocked the proposals from the global south to solve the global debt and financing crisis. These northern governments are defending the status quo – an international financial architecture that protects the interests of big corporations. Billions of people are suffering under austerity and conditionalities of IMF and World Bank that cut public services, increase inequality and create poverty and hunger. To ensure health, education and social protection for all we need a transformed financial international architecture.”

Absolom Jim, chapter lead of Debt for Climate: “The FFD4 process has proved a façade, another Global North-sponsored theatre where the debt noose around our necks is tightened under the disguise of false solutions. Zimbabwe and much of Africa are not asking for charity, we’re demanding system change. We reject debt swaps, delays, and greenwashed gimmicks. The time for compromise is over. The world must hear this from Africa: cancel the debt and dismantle colonial finance.”

Petro Damian, chapter lead of Debt for Climate: “Africa is rich in people, culture, and resources yet trapped in debt it did not create. We demand the cancellation of illegitimate debt and the creation of a fair financial system that allows our continent to thrive, not just survive.”

Arjun Bhattarai, co-chair of Global Call to Action Against Poverty: “We need to halt the debt crisis and prevent it from occurring again. Economic Justice is the key to ending poverty, reducing inequalities and solving the climate crisis.”

Press Releases

Quote sheet for SB62 Outcome. 


Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) 

KEY RESOURCES 1. Op-ed on Germany’s role in blocking climate action (English, German)  2. DCJ Finance Brief authored by Victor Menotti 3. New Research on Carbon Offsets by Corporate Accountability 4. Four countries responsible for nearly 70% of projected CO2 pollution from new oil and gas – Oil Change international 5. Civil Society Letter to UNFCCC Secretariat on censorship of Palestine Solidarity. 7. List of demands from Palestinian COP30 Coalition 7. World’s largest expansion of fossil fuels on the Gulf Coast of the USA, more than all other countries combined. 8. Establishing a UNFCCC Accountability Framework to protect against undue influence of polluting interests

CONTACT For media enquiries: Esthappen S, Communications Coordinator, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (Whatsapp: +91 9820918910, Email: [email protected])

QUOTE SHEET Covering climate finance, adaptation, l&d, JT and other UNFCCC linked agendas with links to genocide in Palestine, wars waged by league of colonisers on global south and inequities in the climate regime and finance architecture.

Format: Name, organisation: Quote.  

  1. Meena Raman, Third World Network:
    The biggest disagreement at Bonn was over the failure of the Global North to address or even listen to the concerns of the Global South. Right at the start, developing countries wanted to discuss how to treat provision of finance from developed countries (Art 9.1 of the Paris Agreement) with the G77 and China wanting a discussion on the agenda but developing countries blocked even a conversation. Whenever developing countries get into the provision of means of implementation (MOI) and finance, developed countries always push back by involving the private sector and muddy the mandate by introducing mobilization. On Global Goals on Adaptation, a key agenda for the Global South, which is an effort to see whether the peoples of the world and countries will be able to adapt through developing indicators starting 2023 eg. On water, health, food, ecosystems… developing countries want to have indicators on means of implementation. But developed countries have opposed this, they want indicators on eg. Official Development Assistance (ODA) as part of adaptation that is not new and additional finance. Developed countries have also refused to talk about finance for formulation and implementation of National Adaptation Plans (NAPs). The Global South wants finance for adaptation, but the Global North takes the Do It Yourself (DIY) approach whenever it comes to implementing climate action in developing countries and their mandatory obligation to provide finance to the South. On Carbon Border Adjustment Measures (CBAM) or unilateral measures which the EU is pushing and Canada, UK are also thinking about introducing, they don’t want to make space for any meaningful discussion which allows for the ventilation of Global South concerns and understanding what impacts these policies have on climate action in the Global South. On the Technology Implementation Program (TIP), they don’t want to talk about intellectual property rights as a barrier to technology transfer and affordable access. Finally, on the UAE Dialogue (Paragraph 97 of the GST Outcome), the big fight has been about the scope. Para 97 falls under the MOI section so developing countries understand it as part of finance discussion, but the Global North is again not aligned. I say it takes two-to-tango but the Global North has left the Global South alone on the dance floor of negotiations at Bonn.  
  2. Lidy Nacpil, Asian People’s Movement for Debt and Development:
    Even as global temperatures reach record-breaking heights, Global North governments continue to be the biggest blockers of climate justice. Following the outrageous outcome of COP29, the Global North continued to dodge their climate finance obligations at SB62–most egregiously blocking a discussion of Article 9.1–while ramping up military spending to 5% of their GDPs. By refusing to honor their climate commitments and preventing progress in these negotiations, the Global North is jeopardizing our world, risking our lives, and killing the Paris Agreement. In spite of these obstructions, which do not bode well for Belém, we look forward to waging our fights at COP30. This world is ours, and we must fight to reclaim it from the polluters, profiteers, and perpetrators of injustice who have brought it to the brink of chaos.
  3. Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice:
    We are the communities on the frontlines of a crisis we did not create—a crisis driven by greed, war, and colonialism. At these climate talks all we saw was the world’s richest governments pour trillions into war machines, fund genocide in Palestine, and protect corporate profit over human life while failing to deliver on their historical responsibility through real public finance. Choosing instead to privatize our lands, forests and water through carbon markets and offsets while sabotaging any meaningful just transition. We condemn the UNFCCC Secretariat’s censorship of civil society for standing in solidarity with Palestine—and we will not be silenced. Climate justice cannot exist in a world where bombs continue to rain on Gaza and corporate power continues to write climate policy. Fight for climate justice is the fight for liberation, everywhere. And at COP30 we will show it is people’s power and not the rich that will shape the future.
  4. Alison Doig, Recourse:
    At the Bonn talks, the private sector has been making a bid to capture the little public climate finance available. We heard a lot about capital markets, green bonds, public-private blending, and multilateral development banks’ role in de-risking, but not nearly enough about the needs of climate-vulnerable communities, women, youth and nature. Ahead of COP30 in Belem, the Brazilian Presidency should re-assert that climate finance must be for grants supporting a just transition to a climate-safe world, not for lining bankers’ pockets.”
  5. Amiera Sawas, Head of Research & Policy, Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative:
    As the Northern hemisphere suffers deadly heatwaves, UN climate talks remain frozen in an out-of-touch process. War and military spending escalated outside, while inside there was no discussion—and no finance. Civil society fought to bring negotiations into the real world, but geopolitics and the fossil fuel lobby kept derailing progress. Even successes, like the draft text for the ‘Just Transition Work Programme’ informed by workers and Indigenous Peoples, were nearly paralyzed by fossil fuel interests at the end. We are already at risk of breaching the 1.5 temperature limit, there’s no time for paralysis. There’s a real risk that the UN climate talks fail to address the crisis’s biggest drivers: coal, oil, and gas. We cannot afford any more failure, we must urgently do better. And we will – whether inside or outside the UN. Brazil is talking big but its actions speak louder than words and its recent approval of new oil extraction in the Amazon is the worst possible signal.
  6. Rachel Rose Jackson, Director of Climate Research & Policy, Corporate Accountability:
    These talks have become completely divorced from the reality of the climate crisis. While trillions of dollars are being poured into nuclear war by the very same governments that are responsible for climate change—and while the very same corporations that knowingly fueled the climate crisis are getting even richer off of these wars—not a penny is offered to the countries and communities already facing life or death from the climate crisis. While countries around the world cave to authoritarianism and the far right, these talks pander to this agenda, rather than resist it. Bonn should have filled in the potholes on the rocky road to Belém. Instead, the road to Belém is now paved with landmines, and the work ahead of us is harder than it has ever been. The signposts on the road to COP30 are clearly marked. End the ability of Big Polluters to write the rules of climate action. Global North governments must do their fair share of climate action and pay their climate debt. End fossil fuels justly and urgently. Reject dangerous distractions and fast-track to Real Zero. Center those on the frontlines—Indigenous Peoples, communities of color, those in the Global South—not Big Polluters. Will world governments course correct immediately, or will they push us off a cliff.
  7. Romain Ioualalen, Global Policy lead at Oil Change International:
    Bonn saw the Global North further retreat from its responsibilities to provide public finance for climate action, instead promoting fabricated narratives on private finance filling the gap – despite evidence the market-led approach is not delivering. On top of blocking finance, rich countries failed their homework on fossil fuels with four Global North countries responsible for 70% of projected oil and gas expansion, which made calls from developed parties to center the fossil fuel phaseout in the negotiations continue to ring hollow and hypocritical. However, an outcome on just transition in Belém is within reach and could provide momentum for centering justice in the transition.
  8. Victor Menotti, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice:
    Bonn’s SB62 took the world backwards from even the Baku Debacle, putting COP30 host Brazil in a sticky situation for sweltering Belem…or Rio? Although Trump has pulled out of the Paris Agreement once again, his pressuring NATO members to spend 5% of GDP on military expansion has sucked all the oxygen out of the otherwise balmy air in Bonn. Developed countries operate a three-prong offensive to counter developing country demands for climate justice: 1) to stop any significant discussion on providing finance per legal commitments under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, as Berlin’s budget due next month means their record borrowing for mainly US defense contractors leaves little to nothing for cutting emissions and adapting to climate impacts in the Global South; 2) to attack Global South countries for their lack of “ambition” in reducing emissions — and pressuring them to do more — despite failing to offer sufficient finance and zero flexibility on WTO patent rules that prevent technology transfer; 3) to keep financing their own fossil fuels frenzy, as Europe and Asia increase investment in LNG export facilities on the US Gulf South, one of four developed countries (along with Canada, Norway and Australia) that make up 70% of planned fossil fuel expansion by 2030.Geopolitics may make the most headlines today, but the Global North’s conduct in international climate talks only expedites the pre-eminence of changing geophysics.
  9. Coraina de la Plaza, Coordinator, Hands Off Mother Earth Alliance:
    We will continue to resist geoengineering inside and outside the UN space, and reminding governments that our planet is not a laboratory but a shared HOME that we all must protect through proven and just sustainable solutions and not by experimenting with risky and unproven geoengineering schemes.
  10. Seranya Solanki, Alliance of Non Governmental Radical Youth:
    Despite the opposition from developed countries and attempts to kill the just transition work programme, we were able to achieve a text in SB62 that would create the space and momentum for the UNFCCC to deliver concrete actions on Just Transition in Belem cop30 for affected workers and communities – that recognises that people-centric, bottom-up, whole-of-society approaches are required to achieve just transitions. Unilateral trade measures have a space to be discussed here on how trade measures in general affect or restrict just transition at the national level especially for countries in the global south – already burdened with high debt burdens and the impacts of climate change. We cannot sacrifice ambition in the mechanism in order to secure any old unjust deal on just transition where rights, justice and equity are ignored. It has taken decades to have a just transition on the international table in the climate negotiations. We are concerned at how parties, despite providing rhetoric on the need for inclusivity and participation of rights holders, have not concretised these principles through operative decisions, which is why we are pushing for a COP30 decision text on calling on countries to establish national institutions for peoples’ participation – where we can guarantee that rights holders are involved in the planning and implementation of just transition measures and policies at the national and local levels. We remain vigilant against the antics of parties who either want to delete all references to fossil fuels or weaken any language on means of implementation. There can be no global Just Transition without an equitable and just phaseout of fossil fuels with developed countries taking immediate action and providing the necessary means of implementation to developing countries with the least historical responsibility for climate change but are most vulnerable to its impacts.
  11. David Williams, Head of International Climate Justice Program, Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung:
    After years of refusing to pay up for climate finance, the EU has this week shown at the NATO conference in The Hague that the money in fact had been available all along. With the frequency and intensity of droughts, heatwaves, floods, and other climate change impacts increasing across the world, those who have caused the crisis are persisting in their abdication of responsibility. Climate finance is not charity, it is an obligation enshrined in international law under the Paris Agreement. With the US exiting various international treaties, the EU cannot hide any more, having to position itself clearly on where it stands in terms of upholding international law. This is an opportunity to rebuild trust and solidarity with the Global South in times of geopolitical turmoil. Whether the EU will seize this opportunity is another question. The early warning signs are deeply concerning.
Interventions

Intervention: Conflict of Interest Q6 (Side event) | June 26

Let me be absolutely clear—civil society has been loud and united in our demands:

First, we need a real, enforceable conflict of interest policy in the UNFCCC space. That means establishing an accountability framework that applies to everyone—governments, observers, and institutions. Disclosure is not enough. We need clear definitions, binding criteria, and consequences when lines are crossed.

Second, there must be an immediate end to big polluters sponsorships and partnerships. There is no justifiable reason why climate talks—meant to serve peoples and the planet—should be bankrolled by those who have profited most from the crisis. No more logos. No more side deals. No more influence in exchange for money.

Third, meaningful participation of frontline and grassroots communities must be guaranteed. We are tired of seeing spaces filled with lobbyists while Indigenous peoples, women, children and youth, and peoples and communities from the frontline of this crisis locked out, tokenized, or simply ignored. Participation must be equitable, funded, safe, and real.

And finally, we demand a complete system reset. That means cutting off the grip of polluting interests and building a system rooted in justice, care, and real climate solutions. It means ending fossil fuel expansion and making space for community-led responses that uphold human rights and Indigenous sovereignty.

These are not radical demands—they are basic protections any legitimate public process should have.

And we are not alone in making them.

These demands come from a movement of over 450 organizations united under the Kick Big Polluters Out campaign. We are climate justice networks, feminist movements, health advocates, youth and Indigenous groups, human rights defenders, and environmental organizations from every region of the world. Together, we represent millions of people who refuse to let those most responsible for the crisis set the terms of the solution.

We’ve exposed the rising number of lobbyists inside these talks. We’ve built pressure on the UNFCCC Secretariat. We’ve shown up at every COP—loud, organized, and clear: get the polluters out.

And let’s be honest—this isn’t complicated. Conflict of interest policies already exist across the UN system. The WHO, the OECD, the UNDP—they all have some level of safeguards. But here at the UNFCCC? Nothing. And that vacuum has been filled with decades of delay, distraction, and denial.

So what needs to happen next?

We are calling on Presidencies and national governments to stop hiding behind the process and step up. Define and implement conflict of interest protections now. Ban polluter partnerships and sponsorships. Guarantee the leadership of the people most impacted. And start building a process that puts life before power and profit.

Because if this space truly intends to protect the peoples and this planet, it cannot continue to be a playground for vested interests. And if governments are serious about climate justice, then cleaning up the process is the first, most basic place to start.

Interventions

Interventions: Conflict of Interest | June 26

I, Rachitaa Guptas, disclose that I have no ties to the fossil fuel industry any other polluting industries, any zionist or apartheid entities and no conflicts of interests.

I don’t think anyone would be suprised by my answer. Otherwise we all would not be here.  It is a BIG ROUND ZERO.

The UNFCCC has no real policy to address conflict of interest. And let’s be clear—this isn’t some innocent gap in the process. It’s a political choice to allow vested interests to shape climate negotiations without scrutiny.

The only token gesture came two years ago when the UNFCCC finally introduced a basic disclosure requirement. Participants are now asked to state who they represent. That’s it. No review, no oversight, no consequences—just a checkbox. And somehow, this was framed as a milestone. But if it takes over 30 years to reach this bare minimum level of transparency, we shouldn’t be clapping. We should be deeply concerned.

Because disclosure is not regulation. It doesn’t protect the process. It doesn’t reduce influence. It certainly doesn’t prevent conflicts of interest. It’s like putting a “Fragile: Handle with Care” sticker on a ticking time bomb and pretending that makes it safe.

And this kind of non-policy is out of step with how most international institutions operate. The World Health Organization has embedded conflict of interest protections into major agreements, like the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, and created systems for managing how non-state actors can engage. The OECD, UNDP, and many other UN agencies have frameworks in place that at least recognize the basic principle: that conflicts of interest exist and should be addressed.

But the UNFCCC? Not even a definition of what a conflict of interest is. That’s right—after decades of climate negotiations, there is still no official recognition of what constitutes undue influence. And we’re told, politely, that the parties would need to agree on one. As if conflict of interest is some kind of new philosophical dilemma. It’s not. It’s a legally and politically established concept, recognized across jurisdictions. There’s no need to reinvent it like some kind of bureaucratic party trick.

The result? A process where vested interests continue to shape outcomes, unchecked and unchallenged. And the lack of regulation doesn’t just raise concerns about who has influence—it also forces us to question who is failing to act, and why.

Let’s stop pretending this is about technical complexity. The problem is simple. The solutions are known. The precedent exists. Institutions around the world have taken steps to limit influence and protect integrity. The UNFCCC has chosen not to. Over and over again.

And that failure is not without consequence. It’s one of the core reasons this process has stagnated for more than 30 years. Because when powerful actors are allowed to shape the rules of accountability, there is no accountability.

So yes, it’s time to ask: Whose interests are really being protected here? Because it’s not the people on the frontlines of this crisis. And it’s certainly not the planet we’re all supposed to be saving.

Press Releases

Global North takes Bonn climate talks backward when we need big advances before Belém (Links to key docs from SB62) 

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

With the US absent at 62nd session of the UNFCCC’s Subsidiary Bodies (SBs) in Bonn, the EU has now become the biggest blocker of climate justice before COP30 in Belem. Not only have we seen officials from Brussels block an agenda item to discuss their failure to deliver on their commitments for climate finance, but NATO countries have just today approved to spend 5% of their GDP on weapons for war.

It takes two-to-tango but the European Union (EU), Umbrella Group and Environmental Integrity Group (EIG) have left the Global South hanging on the dancefloor of negotiations. By blocking critical proposals from the developing countries and refusing to honor the fundamental commitments under the United Nations Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Paris Agreement, the developed countries are jeopardising  the world’s chances of dealing with the looming climate collapse. Not crises, not catastrophe⸺a collapse.   

Instead of rising to the moment, developed countries are blocking advancements on the Just Transition Work Programme and peddling dangerous distractions— carbon markets, offsets, techno fixes, and other false solutions— that serve polluters, not people. 

Join the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) and its members in a press conference on the ‘Outcomes from Bonn’ calling out the blockers of a safe future for the world. 

WHEN 26th June 2025, 10:30 am (GMT+2) Watch live. 

WHERE Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center, Bonn, Germany 

WHO 

  • Meena Raman, Third World Network
  • Seranya Solanki, Alliance of Non Governmental Radical Youth
  • Dylan Hamilton, Alliance of Non Governmental Radical Youth
  • Victor Menotti, DCJ US Coordinator 
  • Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT Esthappen S, Communications Coordinator, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (Whatsapp: +91 9820918910, Email: [email protected])

KEY RESOURCES 1. Op-ed on Germany’s role in blocking climate action (English, German)  2. DCJ Finance Brief authored by VIctor Menotti 3. New Research on Carbon Offsets by Corporate Accountability 4. Four countries responsible for nearly 70% of projected CO2 pollution from new oil and gas – Oil Change international 5. CIvil Society Letter to UNFCCC Secretariat on censorship on Palestine Solidarity. 6. Quote sheet on Bonn outcomes. 7. List of demands from Palestinian COP30 Coalition 8. World’s largest expansion of fossil fuels on the Gulf Coast of the USA, more than all other countries combined.  

Interventions

Closing intervention (SB62)

Thank you. My name is Mohammed Usrof from ANGRY, speaking on behalf of ENGO-DCJ.

I hereby declare that we have NO conflict of interest and NO ties with the fossil fuel industry and any other Zionist entities.

As I speak, a genocide is destroying MY homelnad—erasing lives, ecosystems, and very conditions for survival. This is NOT separate from the climate crisis.

Genocide of my people is fueled and funded by same powers who have profited from colonialism, militarized oppression, extractivism that have caused this crisis.

And after 2 weeks we see ABSOLUTELY NO progress.

Provision of public finance under Article 9.1 and through the UAE dialogue is sidelined.

Carbon markets, offsets, geoengineering and other false solutions distract from real action. Just Transition discussions STILL have no commitment on a global mechanism.

This process CANNOT claim credibility while those here enable violence, exclusion of OUR voices. While they CONTINUE to censor all of us standing in solidarity with those facing war, conflict and genocide.

You CANNOT negotiate around justice—and we will NOT BE silenced.

End the siege. End the genocide. No climate justice under occupation.

Thank you.

أنهوا الحصار

أنهوا الإبادة الجماعية

لا عدالة مناخية في الأراضي المحتلة

Resources

Germany’s role on the Global Stage is fractured

Op-ed by Meena Raman and David Williams

First published in Africa News Analysis in English and German.

Just as the German government agrees to spending billions of Euros primarily for military spending and domestic infrastructure, it is blocking any meaningful discussions on the provision of climate finance at mid-year climate negotiations currently underway in Bonn. Instead of using its diplomatic influence to lobby for a progressive position within the EU (the negotiation bloc within which Germany is a key driving force), Germany has not shown any discernible willingness to improve the catastrophic outcome on climate finance from COP29 in Azerbaijan last year. It would appear that when money is needed for military spending and fossil fuel subsidies, then money can readily be found. However, when money is needed to fulfil obligations under international law, then money is few and far between.

This year’s negotiations in Bonn are essential to lay the foundations for a successful COP30 in Brazil later this year. A letter by the Brazilian COP presidency circulated a few weeks before the climate talks in Bonn emphasized the importance for officials to prevent “procrastination and postponement of decisions” in order to be best prepared heading in to the negotiations in Brazil. However, the talks in Bonn were fractious from the beginning, as the EU blocked a proposal by the G77 + China (a negotiating bloc representing 134 developing countries in the Global South, accounting for around 80% of the world’s population) to include climate finance from industrialized nations to developing countries on the negotiation agenda. This could have enabled a discussion on which countries specifically would provide climate finance, an aspect which was severely watered down at last year’s COP29 in Baku. While a compromise was eventually found in Bonn to add the proposal as a footnote, essentially kicking the can down the road, it caused a significant two-day delay for negotiations to begin.

The Paris Agreement (celebrating its 10-year anniversary) stipulates that industrialized countries must provide finance to developing countries for responding to climate change. In times when many countries are straddled by an ever-increasing debt burden, most do not have the financial resources to invest in transitioning away from fossil fuels. In addition, developing countries also need financial support for adapting and rebuilding after extreme weather events such as floods, heatwaves, or droughts, which are increasing in frequency and intensity with every degree of warming. Countries such as Germany are therefore committed under international law to provide finance to affected countries. This is not a matter of charity or even benevolence, as it is so often portrayed — it is a moral obligation, rooted in the reality that the countries which achieved economic growth through the heavy use of fossil fuels now bear a responsibility to support those who are suffering the consequences.

For decades, Germany’s robust economic growth and commitment to upholding international law through diplomacy have contributed to its positive reputation on the global stage. In recent years however, Germany has alienated countries from the Global South by flagrantly disregarding the core principles of international law by supporting war crimes and genocide committed against Palestinians, and preventing substantial progress on climate finance. Amid geopolitical turbulence, Germany must realign its diplomatic strategy to build strong, trust-based relationships with countries and communities in the Global South, guided by a spirit of solidarity.

About the authors: 

Currently Head of Programmes at the Third World Network (TWN), which is an independent non-profit international research and advocacy organisation involved in issues relating to sustainable development, environment and climate change, developing countries and North South affairs, Meena is also a practicing public interest lawyer and an expert on climate change negotiations, a former member on the Board of the Green Climate Fund. 

David Samuel Williams is a scholar on Global Transformation and Environmental Change and researcher who has worked with communities particularly affected by climate change in Durban, South Africa, and Mauritius. He is particularly interested in how climate change exacerbates inequality and works at the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung.  

Meena Raman and David Williams are both members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ)

Side event

Real Solutions: A system transformation approach to equitable and just transition

📅 Date: June 25, 2025 |  🕓 Time: 16:30–17:45  |📍 Venue: Kaminzimmer
 
Just transition is an opportunity not only to overhaul the fossil fuel-based energy systems but also to address the systemic issues and transform economic, financial, social, and political structures. The event explores real solutions and alternative pathways for equitable, gender-just and human rights-based sustainable development.

Speakers will include representatives from climate justice, Indigenous Peoples, feminist, and human rights, and civil society organisations, and advocacy allies from governments and institutions.


This side event is organised by the Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact Foundation (AIPP), Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD), IBON International, Institute for Socioeconomics Studies (INESC), and Recourse.

Uncategorized

Side event: Halting the engineering of our planet

Geoengineering is portrayed as a solution to climate change and Africa has been targeted by its proponents. Rather than a solution, Geoengineering is a hoax to divert attention from real solutions. Join us for an event that will explore the threats of geoengineering and spotlight the need for precaution.


Date: 25 June, 2025

Time: 10:30–11:45 CEST
Location: Room Kaminzimmer, WCC Bonn

Letters

Civil Society Protest Against UNFCCC Secretariat’s Arbitrary Censorship of Solidarity with Palestine

Bonn, 20th June 2025

Civil society constituencies participating in the UNFCCC climate negotiations have today shared an open letter with all Parties to the Convention, raising urgent concerns over the UNFCCC Secretariat’s arbitrary and escalating censorship of peaceful expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian people.

The letter – signed by the Women and Gender Constituency, YOUNGO, and Environmental Non-Governmental Organisations – the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) and Climate Action Network (CAN), calls attention to the Secretariat’s recent decision to prohibit the use of the phrase “End the Siege” during a planned action at SB62 in Bonn, despite allowing language such as “end the genocide.” 

Read the letter here:

Your Excellencies,

We write to you today with grave concern and indignation.

As civil society, we have been a part of the UNFCCC for close to three decades. Our engagement has included advocating for and bringing voices of peoples and communities on the frontlines through actions and press conferences inside the UNFCCC amongst others. For the last two years in the UNFCCC sessions, COP’s and SB’s, we have faced an escalating pattern of arbitrary censorship from the UNFCCC Secretariat—specifically targeting expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian peoples.

Despite our repeated efforts to navigate and comply with an increasingly ambiguous and inconsistent set of restrictions, the Secretariat has continued to impose arbitrary limits on our collective rights. Legitimate, peaceful expressions of solidarity—statements, words, signs, and slogans that align with international human rights and international humanitarian law—have been censored or blocked.

This situation has reached a new and deeply troubling low. The UNFCCC Secretariat, in a response to an application for a Palestine solidarity action in the venue of SB62, communicated that they could not authorise the use of the phrase “End the Siege” in the banners and any accompanying text. As they did not object to the other phrases we use, including “end the genocide”, their focus on the siege wording is unusual and perplexing. This further demonstrates the arbitrariness of their decision-making.

The reason provided by the UNFCCC Secretariat was their need to “maintain a neutral and constructive environment that supports open dialogue among Parties”, and authorisation must be assessed in light of the current context. We struggle to understand how a clamp down on the calling out of an ongoing and well-documented humanitarian catastrophe can be considered neutral, particularly when the UN Secretary General, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and representatives of other UN bodies have called for the same thing using the same language. In addition, a majority of states who are also Parties to the UNFCCC process have voted for a resolution in the UN General Assembly demanding an immediate and lasting ceasefire and an end to the blockade in Gaza. To silence the call to “End the Siege” is to condone it.

This is no longer a question of procedure or neutrality. It is picking a side, and in this case, a side that does not align with the UN’s own values and international humanitarian law. Civil society has decided to end our negotiations on Palestinian Solidarity actions with the Secretariat that compromises our rights to civic space and freedom of expression within this space. We refuse to accept a decision that directly contradicts the rights and freedoms that the UN was founded to protect. We have therefore decided to make our grievances public in the hope that all people of conscience will support basic human rights and bring it to the attention of Parties because the UNFCCC Secretariat’s attempts at silencing us is done in the name of Parties.

The climate crisis is inseparable from questions of justice and human rights. The Paris Agreement itself is emphatic that “Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights […]”

The Secretariat’s refusal to acknowledge an unfolding crime against humanity, together with its active suppression of calls to end the genocide and siege, and doing so in the name of Parties in the UNFCCC, has deeply shaken our confidence in this body’s ability to safeguard humanity’s future. This is a sentiment that echoes far beyond these walls, and risks making multilateralism irrelevant to humanity.

The UNFCCC Secretariat’s narrow understanding of climate, ignoring its intersections with civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, not only is contrary to the Convention and the Paris Agreement but will lead to a failure in finding systematic and sustained solutions to the climate crisis.

We appeal to Parties to reaffirm the rights of civil society, particularly our freedom of expression in calling out a genocide and the vested interests that uphold this as well as the climate crisis.

Silence is not neutrality.

Sincerely,

Women and Gender Constituency (WGC)

Environmental Non-Governmental Organisations – Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (ENGO/DCJ)

Environment Non-Governmental Organisations – Climate Action Network (ENGO/CAN)

Children and Youth Constituency (YOUNGO)