Category Archives: Interventions

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

Interventions

JTWP | 24 June

DCJ/CAN – ENGO Intervention June 24

Thank you co-chairs. I am speaking on behalf of the Demand Climate Justice and Climate Action Network, the two ENGO constituencies. We are missing the flexibility expressed in the first week and we are concerned about the way forward. We would like to stress the great urgency for this work programme to deliver both, strong principles deriving from the dialogues AND actionable outcomes for people on the ground. The adoption of a solid just transition text stands in sharp contrast to the current global climate riddled with violent conflict. 

We thank the Co-Chairs for developing a draft text that includes some of the proposals observer constituencies and civil society had forwarded. 

On Para 11, we welcome that the key messages from the dialogues are being developed into guiding principles on just transition. We consider that the next dialogues should provide a space to further develop these principles and address certain dimensions of just transition that have not been sufficiently addressed here yet: such as the role of international cooperation and the importance of applying just transition in critical minerals, renewable energy phase-in, food and agriculture systems, and others.


We see para 24-27 as fundamental to address the need for support and international cooperation for just transition pathways

On Para 27 on the role of non-market approaches, we call on all parties to keep this in the decision text.

On Para 28, we strongly urge parties to establish a global mechanism, the Belem Action Mechanism for JT,  that ensures action on just transition that benefits workers, affected communities, and all rightsholders on the ground. We find promise in the strong signals sent by observer constituencies in their alignment on establishing this mechanism. We stand in solidarity with rightsholders in their pursuit of a just transition.

We urge greater specificity in the description of each of the institutional arrangements forwarded by parties, especially listing down the functions that these arrangements will have. Any new institutional arrangement must have a knowledge-sharing arm, an implementation arm for technical assistance, and a coordination body that enables the formal representation of groups affected and rightsholders that must be involved in the decision-making of the principles, practices, and processes of the just transition.

Lastly, we reiterate our call for parties to concretize their sentiments on inclusivity and participation of rightsholders in just transition. This can be done through a decision text that maintains explicit references to human rights in Paras 11b, 11h, and 18 and by Calling on countries to establish national institutions for peoples’ participation that can ensure the involvement of all rights holders in planning and implementing just transition measures and policies at the national and local levels. We are open to engaging all parties in developing language that can address these demands and enable progress on the road to Belem.

Interventions

GGA | 23 June (Cross-constituency)

My name is Lorraine, speaking on behalf of rights-based constituencies – YOUNGO, Women and Gender Constituency, and both ENGOS – Climate Action Network and the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

We stand in solidarity with those suffering from the wars across the world and strongly condemn that public funds go to funding militarism instead of climate finance. We call for an end to the wars.

We value the immense work done so far on the Global Goal on Adaptation, but it is time that we ensure that people and ecosystems are actually protected from devastating climate impacts, and for that, adaptation finance is an absolute prerequisite. Any further delay in the provision of finance for adaptation will translate into loss of life and permanent displacement across the Global South. We need to start both the technical phase and the political phase now. 

We are all aware that Article 9.1 creates a hard obligation for developed country Parties to provide finance for developing country Parties. Thus, the inclusion of MOI indicators in the GGA is crucial to track this financial provision from developed to developing countries. We really cannot leave Bonn without agreeing on a way forward on the MOI indicators. Such indicators need to assess the provision of finance based on the principle of Justice and Equity, based on CBDR – and thus we cannot accept any indicators on ODA and national budgets. Closing the adaptation gap requires scaled-up grant-based public funding that is accessible, predictable, and in alignment with local priorities. So we also demand a follow-up to the Glasgow commitment. 

Let us be clear – adaptation is a right to survival, especially of the most vulnerable. We urge you to center them in cross-cutting considerations. No framework of indicators will be complete without consideration for the specific circumstances of gender, local and Indigenous communities, age, disability, racial and ethnic minorities, migrants, and workers. 

To close our intervention, we recognize that global solidarity is at a crossroads today. We want to believe in multilateralism, which we have all put our faith in. So, for communities across the world to really believe in your “commitment to progress,” we need immediate action for our collective survival, we need the provision of adaptation finance, and MOI indicators to track this, and we need it NOW.

Interventions

SJW on Agriculture | 23 June

My name is Catherine from World Animal Protection. I am speaking on behalf of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, one of the ENGOs.

We congratulate the room on the conduct of the first workshop. We were pleased to hear agroecology and just transition mentioned in several party presentations, and we left the day full of hope. 

As the only formal space within the UNFCCC that is mandated to guide global climate action on food and agriculture, it is your responsibility to address the ongoing climate crisis in the sector. That said, we are noting our deep disappointment that this Joint Work is in the state that it is.

However, we are still meaningfully engaging with the matter at hand. We appreciate the annexes proposed for the next workshop on means of implementation, which covers substantive issues, including clarifying the state of financing of climate action in agriculture and what vulnerable groups need in order to access these funds. We also appreciate its inclusion in para 7 of the text.

Seeing the dire state of this Joint Work – unable to agree on a text, unsure whether the synthesis report can be completed, the portal improved, or if the next workshop can be held – we are once again confronted by your complete disregard for the suffering of millions of people as we speak. Let’s bring back substantive discussions on agriculture in this agriculture negotiation room – and not be bogged down by procedural issues. As movements representing frontline communities experiencing the brunt of the food and climate crises, we urge you to ring all the alarms to ensure that this JW completes what it has been mandated to do – the implementation of climate action for a food-secured world where small producers and vulnerable communities thrive.

Interventions

AIM | 21 June

DCJ/CAN – ENGO Intervention June 21

Tobias Holle

Thank you for giving us the floor. I’m speaking on behalf of ENGO-CAN and ENGO-DCJ

We align with the intervention of the other rights-based constituencies and explicitly echo the intervention by the WGC to call on Parties to propose the creation of a formal Disability Constituency to represent their interests directly – they need to sit at this very table.

In the last years we have seen a continued assault on civic space, in and outside of the venue with regrettable complicity of the UNFCCC. Freedom of speech and of peaceful assembly are human rights and key for effective climate action at all levels, local, regional, and international, and must be protected in order to ensure meaningful observer engagement in the process which will lead to stronger outcomes. We urge parties to require the Secretariat to protect freedom of expression and peaceful assembly in the Blue Zone and to facilitate advocacy actions that do not unduly restrict the ability of observers to creatively and powerfully communicate their messages.

The crucial tasks of observers can only be fulfilled if they are in negotiation rooms – assuming they received a visa as already stated in our intervention yesterday. Those rooms have to be open, accessible and interpretation needs to be guaranteed. The ticketing system is inadequate and chaotic; there should be space for at least 2 people per constituency in each negotiation. We welcome the promise by the COP30 presidency to include all rights-based observer constituencies in the pre-COP events and look forward to a meaningful engagement.

We thank the parties proposed constituencies to hold their interventions in plenary sessions after the regional groups which is a lasting proposal from constituencies.

At the same time, the intransparency of the badge allocation processes including the allocation of Party Overflow badges is an ongoing issue and limits us in our coordination throughout the year as well as proposing concrete steps in more meaningful engagement regarding the increased number of observer organisations.

We also must recognize that observers representing polluting interests are beholden to advance an agenda that is in direct contravention with the mandate of the UNFCCC. We call on Parties to finally take steps to protect the UNFCCC from the undue and vested interests of the fossil fuel and other emissions intensive industries. This should involve adopting rigorous measures to guide engagement with representatives from non-governmental organizations. These measures should prevent entities with private, polluting interests from unduly influencing or undermining UNFCCC activities and processes through their engagement as representatives of non-governmental organizations; strengthen the process for admission and accreditation of observers within the UNFCCC and its convenings; and draw on established international precedents, including from other UN bodies.

Thank you!

Interventions

JTWP | 21 June

Thank you co-chairs. My name is Caroline Brouillette and I am speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network and Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, the two ENGO constituencies.

Civil Society has been asking for operational decisions on Just Transition since the beginning of the work programme, and would like to make a case for five operational decisions: 

  • Our version of an institutional arrangement for JT, A Global Just Transition Mechanism
  • Principles on Just Transition that would underpin this mechanism
  • Guidance for national participatory institutions on Just Transition.
  • A call for the Financial mechanism to expand provision of and access to funding for JT
  • Explicitly reference  to dimensions of the transition that must be covered by the work programme to ensure those happen in a just way, such as but not limited to:
  • fossil fuel phase-out
  • food systems transformation
  • ecosystem protection and restoration, 
  • renewable energy deployment
  • Fair supply chains in transition minerals, 
  • Adaptation and climate resilience
  • and industry and /transport alignment with climate goals

We welcome the support by many parties already for the launch of a Global Just Transition mechanism. From our perspective, the mechanism would accelerate progress and cooperation through 3 key functions, (very well explained by South Africa):  coordination,  knowledge sharing  and implementation.

We are hearing Parties signaling the risk of an institutional arrangement such as our call for Belem Action Mechanism for JT, adding to fragmentation or duplication.  Outside of this space, Just Transition is being  disconnected from the goals of the Paris agreement, and  many voices are absent  in steering Just Transition work moving forward. If Parties want all efforts on just transition to be directed towards achieving the objectives of the PA, in a way that secures justice for workers, communities and countries, it belongs to the UNFCCC to facilitate, accelerate and contribute to the coordination of efforts through the Global Mechanism. 

The idea that political messages alone will satisfy workers and communities,  is disappointing.  We do expect Parties that reflect on how their own communities will feel, in the moment in which we are living now, with inequalities and climate impacts rising and serious concerns on climate policies impacts on working people, that the only thing this process can do is send a message for others to follow.

We will submit a more detailed version of this statement in full to the Secretariat for distribution to parties. Thank you very much.

Interventions

JTWP | 20 June

Thank you. I am speaking on behalf of both ENGOs the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice and Climate Action Network International.

On Synergies Across the UN System and Beyond, specifically “Cross-border impacts of climate related trade measures”

We agree that the issue of unilateral trade measures not only has a recognized status under the Convention (particularly in Article 3.5), but is also within the agreed upon scope of the JTWP, particularly under Article 2 (C) of Decision 3/CMA.5, which addresses the challenges and barriers relating to sustainable development and poverty eradication as part of transition.

However, unilateral trade measures are not the only trade-related challenge or barrier to equitable and just transitions. There are several global trade rules and measures that prevent technology transfer to developing countries and fetter developing countries’ ability for implementing industrial policies and economic diversification that can accelerate just transitions. 

We do not need to list these now, but we believe that broader trade rules and measures, whether multilateral or unilateral, as they relate to or constrict domestic climate actions and just transition implementation, should be addressed by the JTWP and the Global Just Transition Mechanism that civil society groups are proposing.

Additionally, we would also like to support Parties that have expressed the importance of flagging the connection between the JTWP and the Financial Mechanism and the call for them to expand provision of and access to funding for the development and implementation of Just transition policies, plans, programmes and practices, including through the provision of additional, non-debt inducing, public climate finance.

Lastly, When it comes to ensuring the transition does not worsen existing gender inequalities, we would like to remind Parties that the Gender Action Plan is an existing implementable framework, whose activities can connect to just transition. Work under the Just Transition Work Programme should be clearly synergised with the GAP

Interventions

GGA-SBSTA Chair- IPCC Event | 20 June

This is Pang from the Philippines, speaking on behalf of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice and Environmental NGOs across the world. 

We appreciate this transparent and comprehensive update. We also deeply appreciate the space given for observers to share our views. 

In AR 6, it was already reported that hard and soft adaptation limits have been reached in some ecosystems and regions. AR6 also confirms that current global financial flows for adaptation are insufficient for and constrain implementation of adaptation action in developing countries. We can all agree that this paints a bleak picture of global adaptation efforts, and we foresee adaptation gaps to grow from now until AR7 is released 3 years from now.

This is why we hope that AR7 would be useful in supporting Parties’ urgent implementation of adaptation action, instead of being an empty intellectual process.

In your presentation, you mentioned how indicators are covered in multiple parts of the AR7 outline. Could we clarify that these indicators you mentioned are the GGA indicators and not another separate set? 

If these indicators you refer to are not the same as the GGA indicators, may we clarify how the GGA indicators will come into the AR7 report? GGA indicators will be ready by COP30, which should be enough time to fold them into AR7 in your first meeting on indicators in March 2026. 

Again, as movements representing those bearing the brunt of the ongoing climate catastrophe, our goal is for AR7 to support real adaptation action on the ground and to work in concert with outcomes here at the UNFCCC. We warn against unnecessary duplication that would not only waste valuable public funds but would render party-driven work in GGA indicator development irrelevant.

Hoping for clarity here. Thank you.

Interventions

GST Roundtables | 19 June

My name is Claire Miranda from Demand Climate Justice, speaking on behalf of ENGO.

I want to disclose that I am not affiliated with, nor supported by any fossil fuel entity. 

Today’s NDC Dialogue asks crucial questions which we want to address by urging Parties to consider their NDCs— for both ambition AND equity. The only way NDCs will add up to adequate collective action is if all agree to do their fair share.

Almost all countries will claim their contributions are aligned with the 1.5C temperature goal, but parties who contributed the most to today’s climate crisis must also contribute the most to collective global efforts. That means countries with the highest historical emissions and respective capabilities must do their “fair share” — by cutting emissions faster and deeper than the mere global average, and by providing support at scale commensurate with needs.

It is therefore not enough for countries with the greatest historical responsibilities to merely cut their domestic emissions by the global average of 60% by 2035, as urged by the IPCC. That figure is a global benchmark — not a free pass for polluters. If you polluted more, you must reduce more, and do so faster. Because higher responsibility demands higher ambition. Parties can refer to the Climate Equity Reference Calculator, which is readily available online, to know how much are their fair shares.

During the first Global Stocktake, we heard it repeatedly: the GST must inform the next round of NDCs. That cannot be reduced to vague intentions — it must translate into action. It means fast emission reductions, especially from developed countries. It means financing real fossil fuel phaseout plans – including oil and gas. It means protecting and restoring ecosystems, and halting and reversing deforestation and degradation. It means fully funding adaptation and just transition plans in the Global South. And above all, it means the provision of sufficient, predictable, and grant-based climate finance — in both quantity and quality — from developed to developing countries.

We are disappointed with the first NDCs published so far — most fall far short of what this moment demands. Alarmingly, we just learned that just four Global North countries are collectively responsible for nearly 70% of projected new oil and gas expansion from 2025 to 2035. These are the very countries that should be leading the energy transition — not doubling down on fossil fuels and business-as-usual. Their NDCs must show a clear, urgent pathway to a full, fair, and funded fossil fuel phaseout.

We call on all Parties to honor the promises of the GST and deliver NDCs aligned with the 1.5°C goal, rooted in climate justice. And we expect developed countries — with their historic responsibility and vast resources — to lead the way, not obstruct it.

Thank you.

Interventions

BAKU TO BELEM ROADMAP Consultation with non-party stakeholders | 19 June (Joint CAN and DCJ statement, delivered)


The path from Baku to Belém must not become another road paved with broken promises and delayed justice. The demand is clear, and the answer is simple: the Global North must deliver—Fully. Urgently. Unconditionally. And in line with CBDR and equity.

It is not a matter of charity. It is about justice, a matter of reparations to climate debt, of historical responsibility, and of justice.


In Baku, we saw again how this process continues to be manipulated to favor the interests of the Global North, with decisions made abruptly and without transparency or accountability. What should be a matter of justice has been reduced to a mere diplomatic exercise, detached from the urgent realities on the ground. We have to emphasize: this is not about diplomacy, it’s about peoples survival, and survival cannot be negotiated.

The Global North may celebrate the $1.3 trillion per year as a victory—as if it was bold, as if it was historic. IT IS NOT. The scale of climate impacts  as shown in the and the documented needs across the Global South—reflected in the Needs Determination Report and lived daily by frontline communities—make clear that this figure is far from enough.

And so, if the number is already gravely inadequate, the quality must not fail too. The Roadmap must not become yet another hollow declaration of intent. We need to know – how will climate finance be delivered? How will developed countries increase their provision of climate finance to contribute to the $300 billion target? On what terms? Through which channels? With what priorities? Because when climate finance comes in the form of loans, creating new debt, when it supports fossil fuel expansion, or when it bypasses the very communities most impacted, it is not climate finance—it is exploitation repackaged as solidarity, injustice disguised as support.

So let’s be honest: the question really is not capacity. It is political will. And if justice is the goal, here is what the Roadmap must deliver::

  1. Finance for loss and damage must be clearly included in the roadmap part of the roadmap—fully funded, not deferred and be used to allow . The roadmap must not help polluters escape from taking responsibility for the losses and damages they created.
  2. The roadmap must sketch out how to significantly scale up public grant finance for adaptation such as through tripling adaptation finance by 2030 as suggested by the LDCs.
  3. No more loans and debt-creating mechanisms. It is time to stop pretending that these are climate support. Climate finance must come through public grants, not financial instruments that entrench dependency and push the Global South deeper into poverty.
  4. Every public and private institution must immediately pull out of coal, oil, and gas. Continued investment in fossil fuel infrastructure is not just immoral—it is a direct assault on life and the planet.
  5. The richest individuals and corporations must be taxed. Climate justice is impossible without wealth redistribution, and the global transition must be paid for by those who have profited most from extraction and exploitation.
  6. Funding war and genocide must end. Slash military budgets. End arms deals. Fund climate justice, not destruction.
  7. Guarantee direct access for frontline communities. The Roadmap must protect and expand direct access for developing countries, Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and other most affected groups through dedicated, simplified, and decolonized channels.
  8. Climate finance cannot be left to markets that prioritize profit over people. The Private Sector, MDBs and IFIs must stop imposing conditionalities, pushing loans, and reinforcing colonial power structures. The roadmap must reject models that extract more than they give and instead commit to public, grant-based finance that empowers communities, not creditors.
  9. Global North governments must present clear, enforceable plans for climate finance delivery, backed by annual targets, transparent mechanisms, and legal accountability. No more vague declarations. No more pledges that vanish after the headlines. It’s time for real delivery, with justice at its core.

The prosperity of the Global North was built on the lands, labor, and suffering of the Global South. That history cannot be erased—and it must not be ignored in the face of a crisis the Global South did not create.

What the Baku to Belem Roadmap must now deliver is not another round of promises. It demands a decisive break from the systems of exploitation that created this crisis. That break begins with the full, timely, and unconditional delivery of climate finance obligations. Anything less is not just insufficient—it is injustice.