Expert Mechanism on the Right to the Development Opens its Twelfth Session

The Expert Mechanism on the Right to the Development today opened its twelfth session in Geneva, the theme of which is addressing current challenges in realising the right to development nearly 40 years after the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development.

Paul Empole Losoko Efambe, Vice-President of the Human Rights Council and Permanent Representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the United Nations Office at Geneva, and Nada Al-Nashif, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, gave opening statements.

Mr. Losoko Efambe said that the world continued to face multiple challenges that threatened the realisation of the fundamental right to development, making the work of the Expert Mechanism more relevant and crucial than ever.  He said the continued efforts of the Expert Mechanism would contribute greatly to the realisation of the right to development.

Ms. Al-Nashif said today, declining respect for human rights and multilateralism were threatening hard-won development gains.  Trade wars and crushing levels of debt were adding to the strain, while global development assistance kept shrinking.  She said it was time to move from words to action and to make the right to development real in people’s lives.

The Expert Mechanism then held a general debate with Member States and civil society representatives, in which speakers addressed topics including reforms to the international financial system and debt relief, equitable access to new technologies such as artificial intelligence, climate financing, and a proposed global convention recognising the right to development as an inalienable human right.

Speaking in the debate were Ghana (on behalf of the African Group), the European Union, Venezuela (on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defence of the United Nations Charter), Uganda (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Spain, Venezuela, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Ethiopia, Kuwait, Indonesia, Eritrea, Uganda, China, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Kenya, Bangladesh, India, Iran, Cuba, Algeria, Egypt, and Sierra Leone.

Also speaking were the South Centre, Associazione Comunità Papa Giovanni XXIII, Indian Council of South America, International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations, and International Observatory for Peace, Democracy and Human Rights.

Subsequently, the Expert Mechanism considered a draft thematic study entitled “Climate finance: vulnerability and responsibility”.  Presenting the study, Isabelle Durant, Member of the Expert Mechanism, said it examined the potential of carbon markets as income sources for indigenous peoples and for financing climate adaption efforts in developing countries, within the context of the right to development.

In the ensuing discussion, speakers welcomed the study’s call to embed right to development principles across all climate governance frameworks, and made statements on reform of the international financial architecture and means of mitigating potential negative effects of carbon market projects.

Speaking in the discussion was the Bahamas, as well as the Indian Council of South America, the South Centre, Associazione Comunità Papa Giovanni XXIII, and Centre Europe-Tiers Monde.

Next, the Mechanism held the first of the five thematic discussions scheduled for the session, which addressed reflections and proposals for commemorating the fortieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Right to Development. Members of the Mechanism, as well as State and civil society representatives, gave statements, addressing global issues inhibiting the realisation of the right to development and proposing measures for overcoming them.  Speakers also presented planned measures for promoting the right to development domestically and internationally.

Speaking in the discussion were Venezuela, Iran, the Russian Federation, Qatar, Morocco, Iraq, Pakistan, China, and Mozambique. 

Also speaking were the South Centre, the National Human Rights Institution of Panama, the Human Rights Centre of the Republic of Uzbekistan, International Patriotic Pact Organization, Women’s Federation for World Peace International, Associazione Comunità Papa Giovanni XXIII, International Committee for the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas, and International Observatory for Peace, Democracy and Human Rights.

The Expert Mechanism on the Right to the Development is a subsidiary body of the Human Rights Council established in 2019 under resolution 42/23.  It provides the Council with thematic expertise on the right to development in searching for, identifying and sharing best practices with Member States, and promotes the implementation of the right to development worldwide.

The twelfth session of the Expert Mechanism is being held in Geneva from 27 to 29 October.  Summaries of the public meetings can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.  The programme of work of the Expert Mechanism’s twelfth session and other documents related to the session can be found here.

The Expert Mechanism on the Right to the Development will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 28 October, to begin the second day of the session.

Opening Statements

PAUL EMPOLE LOSOKO EFAMBE, Vice-President of the United Nations Human Rights Council and Permanent Representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said it was an honour to open the twelfth session of the Council's Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development.  The Human Rights Council attached great importance to the right to development as a universal and inalienable right and an integral part of fundamental human rights.  In its numerous resolutions on the right to development, the Council reaffirmed that all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, could only be fully realised in an inclusive and collaborative framework at the international, regional and national levels. 

The twelfth session of the Expert Mechanism came at a crucial time, almost 40 years after the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development, which, together with the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, constituted the essential framework for promoting the right to development.  Yet, despite the progress made, the world continued to face multiple challenges that threatened the realisation of this fundamental right. It was in this context that the work of the Expert Mechanism was more relevant and crucial than ever.

At its sixtieth session, the Council held an interactive dialogue with the Chairperson of the Expert Mechanism, who presented the annual report of the Mechanism as well as its two new thematic studies on the implementation of the right to development in international development cooperation, and on climate justice, sustainability and the right to development. In addition, in its latest resolution on the right to development, the Council welcomed the annual report of the Expert Mechanism, as well as its thematic studies.  Over the next three days, the Expert Mechanism would conduct in-depth discussions on a range of key themes, including climate finance, public participation as a tool for development, the impacts of tariffs and artificial intelligence, as well as the role of civil society organizations at the local level in realising the right to development.  The session would also provide a valuable platform for debate and sharing good practices between States in the sphere of development. 

The Council recognised that persistent financial constraints and the cash position continued to limit the ability of the Mechanism to fully implement its mandate.  Despite these difficulties, the Council remained convinced that the continued efforts of the Expert Mechanism would contribute greatly to the realisation of the right to development.

NADA AL-NASHIF, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that in recent decades, the world had become safer, fairer, more inclusive, and more prosperous.  Human rights were at the heart of this progress.  Yet today, declining respect for human rights and multilateralism were threatening hard-won development gains.  Conflicts were causing appalling suffering as some countries ignored the rules of war, targeting civilians and critical infrastructure.  There were growing pushbacks on climate action, civic participation, diversity and equality – even in countries that once championed them.

Trade wars and crushing levels of debt were adding to the strain, while global development assistance continued to shrink.  The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development projected another nine to 17 per cent drop in 2025, and up to 25 per cent drop in bilateral assistance for the least developed countries.  Meanwhile, military spending had soared to record highs.  The results spoke for themselves: poverty reduction had stalled, and virtually all Sustainable Development Goals were off track.  The World Bank had warned of a lost decade for development.

This path was reversible.  At the eightieth session of the United Nations General Assembly, a clear majority of leaders called for a return to the values of the United Nations Charter, and for revitalised cooperation anchored in global solidarity.  The right to development offered a concrete way to answer this call and translate these values into action.  It reminded all that human rights were neither exclusive nor abstract, and envisioned a world anchored in justice and inclusivity.

At the national level, integrating the right to development into fiscal policies and social protection systems helped shift towards human rights-based economies. Globally, all needed to reshape the international financial architecture so that all countries could deliver for their citizens.  This meant aligning financing with human rights and addressing the structural barriers that held development back.  Earlier this year, there were promising steps in the right direction with the adoption of the Sevilla Commitment, which included the establishment of a dedicated platform for borrower countries to strengthen their voice in the global debt architecture.

Nearly 40 years had passed since the General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Right to Development.  It was time to move from words to action to realise this right in practice.  The Expert Mechanism helped in that regard by translating the normative framework into practical guidance for national policies and international cooperation.

Ms. Al-Nashif welcomed the Mechanism’s annual report and two studies presented to the Human Rights Council last month, which directly addressed the challenges faced today. The first study – on operationalising the right to development in international development cooperation – offered tools to make development cooperation fairer and more effective. The second study – on climate justice, sustainability, and the right to development – showed how the right to development could help achieve the goals of environmental sustainability and economic development, laying out concrete ideas to ensure that the interests of the most vulnerable counted.  The Mechanism’s upcoming studies would take these efforts further, looking at climate finance and at emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence, to make sure they did not deepen inequalities, but rather became a tide that lifted all boats.

The Office of the High Commissioner stood firmly with Member States in advancing the right to development, tackling unilateral coercive measures and the non-repatriation of funds of illicit origin, and assisting States in building human rights economies.  Across 80 projects in 38 countries, it supported with budget analysis, advice on debt servicing, and guidance on promoting the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment.

In an interconnected world, progress was only real when it was shared – when every person, everywhere could live with dignity and hope.  The right to development helped the world achieve this progress.  Ms. Al-Nashif concluded by calling for commitments to be turned into real change during the session.

General Debate

In the debate, speakers, among other things, welcomed the convening of the twelfth session of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, and reaffirmed their commitment to protecting and promoting the right to development.  The valuable work of the Experts and their role in promoting the right to development was greatly appreciated.  The programme of work for the session addressed some of the core challenges faced by developing countries.  Speakers emphasised that it was vital to recognise the right to development as a fundamental human right.  Some speakers also expressed concern at the ongoing challenges and obstacles which continued to affect the Expert Mechanism.  The Office of the High Commissioner was urged to provide all possible resources to the Expert Mechanism to allow it to discharge its important mandate.   

Many speakers underscored that development was a universal, inalienable human right, indivisible from all human rights.  Development was a right, not a privilege.  It was the master key to solving all issues.  Development everywhere brought lasting peace, security and wellbeing for all.  Achieving the right to development was a moral requirement, incumbent on all for future generations.  Speakers stressed their steadfast commitment to working with United Nations partners and the international community to achieve the right to development.    

The primary responsibility for sustainable development rested with States that needed to provide an enabling environment for the achievement of this human right. A gender perspective was key to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.  Women were an axis for transformation and their voices must be fully incorporated in decision-making processes.  Ensuring the protection of civil society and human rights defenders was a prerequisite for the right to development.  The fortieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Right to Development next year should be a cornerstone of States’ commitment to obtain the effective implementation of this human right.  The milestone presented an opportunity to raise awareness of, operationalise and integrate the right to development in regional and international frameworks. Unfortunately, 40 years after this adoption, many commitments had not been achieved. 

Any policy to advance the right to development should adhere to international human rights law.  Shared strategies were vital for achieving the right to development.  The international community should tackle human rights in an equal manner, avoiding politicisation.  The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights must be intentional in championing the right to development, one speaker said, and give it the same priority as other mandates.  Only through genuine cooperation and dialogue could the right to development be strengthened. Unfortunately, progress in achieving the human right of development left much to be desired, said one speaker.  It was troubling that the right to development remained under strain, including due to crises, armed conflicts, environmental degradation, and unethical uses of diverse technologies. 

Urgent reforms to the financial system, including debt relief, were vital.  There needed to be a comprehensive reform of the international financial architecture, including repatriating illicit financial flows.  The global development architecture needed to be inclusive.  Speakers called for a reformed and equitable global trading system, which guaranteed fair access to markets for all, including the Global South. To achieve the right to development, the unfair current economic order needed to be reformed.  An effective multilateral system needed to be established to address the issue of debt.  Technological processes should serve humanity and ensure that developing countries were not left behind.  They needed to bridge, rather than widen cultural divides.  Artificial intelligence was changing the way that art was being made, one speaker said.  It was essential that all countries had equitable access to artificial intelligence.

Climate change continued to exacerbate vulnerability across the Global South, disproportionality impacting developing countries, some speakers said.  Low- and middle-income countries continued to suffer the implications of climate change, even when they were not at fault, speakers emphasised.  Despite negligible contributions to global emissions, some countries were increasingly facing climate-induced disasters.  All States needed to realise that climate change was not a fabricated lie; they must reverse misguided climate policies and promote green transformation.  Countries needed to increase funding to climate finance, and developed countries must honour their commitments to climate finance. 

There needed to be a stepping-up of efforts to ensure approval by the United Nations General Assembly to create a global compact on the right to development.  Some speakers called for an early adoption of the legally binding instrument on the right to development, which they said would translate political commitments into action, ensuring that no one was left behind.  The adoption of the instrument would provide a robust legal framework to ensure the full realisation of this fundamental right and would be a decisive step by the international community in promoting equitable, inclusive access to development for all peoples.  Recent progress in the Human Rights Council to progress towards this instrument indicated this was the political will of the vast majority. 

One speaker expressed reservations towards the current draft of the legally binding instrument, regarding the language and compliance with international human rights law. There was also concern about the debate and the overlap of the mandates on the right to development.  All Member States were urged to engage constructively in the process and refrain from procedural or political delays.  To block or delay this process for flimsy reasons was equivalent to picking food from the mouth of a low developing country by a developed country, one speaker said. 

Many speakers outlined steps taken in their countries to achieve the right to development, including declining poverty rates; meaningful public participation in formulating development plans; contributing to the global development initiative; attending high-level meetings relating to development; making commitments to promoting a green transformation globally through specific projects; hosting key events pertaining to the climate agenda; promoting the participation of civil society organizations in key dialogues contributing to the right to development; people-centred national development plans; and strengthening the role of civil society organizations in development monitoring programmes, among other measures. 

The right to development should not be constricted through the implication of unliteral coercive measures, some speakers said.  Unilateral coercive measures seriously limited the ability of States to enjoy the right to development.  Such policies were motivated by false policies against fundamental freedoms to exert pressure on sovereign States.  Some speakers acknowledged that the persistence of colonialism and the exploitation of resources from other States also hindered the achievement of the right to development.  Inclusivity was essential to correct structural inequalities descending from the colonial era.  The right to development was about addressing deep-rooted historical injustices and transforming global structures into fairer and more equitable systems. 

Responses by Members of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development

KLENTIANA MAHMUTAJ, Vice Chair of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said climate-induced migration was a specific concern for the Mechanism.  Climate disasters were expected to displace at least one billion people by 2050. International cooperation needed to be strengthened to help developing nations cope with the impact of climate change. Global inequalities persisted and had deepened.  The richest nations continued to benefit most from trade, finance and technology while the poorest remained locked in cycles of debt and dependency.  Development was a fundamental human right and was both an individual right and a collective right.

Equitable access to artificial intelligence was essential for protecting cultural rights and ensuring diversity.  Regulation of artificial intelligence was required to ensure that thoughts, cultures and languages were preserved and not undermined.  Immigrants were increasingly subject to very harsh responses.  They were vilified and sometimes criminalised. There was increasing anti-immigration rhetoric by some Governments in the Global North; this was very alarming. A more constructive approach grounded in human rights and the rule of law was needed.  States needed to integrate migrants and include them in all development efforts.

MIHIR KANADE, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said States had an obligation to respect civil and political rights, but a heavily indebted, least-developed country could not guarantee the rights to food, health, education and housing without resources, and significant investments were also needed to maintain a functioning police force.  The right to development should not only be considered as an individual right; it had been recognised as a collective right in several regional and international fora and legislation.  It would be fruitful to consider how to reconcile tensions between individual and collective rights when they arose.

ISABELLE DURANT, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said the right to development was not a subsidiary right; it was equal to all other rights.  Regional cooperation was important to achieving the right to development.  Ms. Durant said the debate had addressed carbon exchanges and transfers, which could be one tool for climate financing; repatriation of illicit financing; climate migration; the rights of refugees; and transformation of the international financial architecture. During the session, the Expert Mechanism would consider issues such as the reintroduction of high customs tariffs, as well as the role of young people, who were vital to realising the right to development.

JUANA MARÍA IBAÑEZ RIVAS, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said speakers’ statements indicated that there was a consensus that the right to development was a human right on par with other internationally recognised rights.  States had highlighted the importance of their obligations under the right to development, as well as of sharing information and cooperating.  Every State needed to guarantee the right to development in its immediate context, and it was important to bear in mind the principle of non-regression.  Statements also highlighted security challenges, which the Expert Mechanism needed to consider.  The Expert Mechanism worked with other United Nations agencies to prevent overlap in their efforts.

BONNY IBHAWOH, Chair of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said there was an opportunity now to move away from regional and ideological polarisations that had characterised discussions on the right to development for the last 40 years.  There was currently an erosion of public trust in many parts of the world, including in established liberal democracies, a rise in exclusionary politics globally, and growing polarisation.  Addressing these challenges required collaboration.  The right to development was founded on the notion that society worked better when it allowed all communities to rise, and allowed for economic, social and cultural participation.  Challenges faced by the global community could be addressed by a legally binding convention on the right to development.  States needed to approach international human rights, including the right to development, without cherry-picking the rights that they respected out of convenience.  The international human rights regime was holistic, indivisible and interdependent.

Consideration of Draft Thematic Study on Climate Finance: Vulnerability and Responsibility

Thematic Study 

The Expert Mechanism has before it the draft thematic study entitled “Climate finance: vulnerability and responsibility” (A/HRC/EMRTD/12/CRP.2). 

Presentation of the Study 

ISABELLE DURANT, Member of the Expert Mechanism, said the question of climate financing was an existential threat to all, and climate justice was needed.  To ensure the transition was a just one, it must be financed.  For her study, Ms. Durant said she had taken different issues into context, including the Conference of Parties in November, with financing for adaptation being one of the main topics discussed.  There were asymmetrical considerations, including that those who were the most impacted were those who least contributed to the climate crisis.  The Paris Accord was also an important topic for everyone, along with article 6 of the agreement which put in place a mechanism for the carbon footprint to be distributed equally.  There were countries with carbon repositors, including in the Amazon basin, and Ms. Durant had considered to what extent monetising this carbon could be a potential income source for financing adaptation.  What would be the conditions for such monetisation, as well as the price? 

Ms. Durant said her study also focused on how different goals could be met, including “clean cooking”, looking at the different ways that coal and wood cooking could be approached.  To what extent were women being exposed to such emissions in the household?  These issues would be looked at from environmental and health reasons, among others. Ms. Durant said she had also considered the principle of the right to development, and the participation of those concerned, particularly indigenous peoples.  Under what conditions could carbon be a source of revenue and under what conditions could it not?  What would be the rules for such a carbon market?  How could it be ensured that it would not impoverish those already in a transition?

FANCY CHEPKEMOI TOO, Permanent Representative of Kenya to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said climate change continued to exacerbate vulnerabilities across the Global South, threatening livelihoods and the right to development.  Kenya had actively supported the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, but the recent troubling reduction of official development assistance had compounded difficulties being faced by the State.  Climate justice needed to be grounded by human rights principles and climate financing needed to be treated as a vehicle for realising sustainable development.

Kenya had launched climate financing initiatives that aligned with the State’s nationally determined contributions.  These had supported renewable energy projects and climate change mitigation and adaption measures.  Kenya supported the development of quality carbon credits that promoted investment in conservation, clean energy and climate adaption projects.  Kenya had also promoted clean cooking solutions to reduce household emissions and improve health outcomes for women and children. South-South cooperation was important, but should not replace North-South cooperation.  Kenya would continue to work with African States and promote just climate financing mechanisms that respected human rights, empowered vulnerable populations, and supported collective action consistent with the right to development.  Failure to close climate financing gaps would lead to immense setbacks to sustainable development and security worldwide.

KATRINA HARINA BORROMEO, United Nations Environment Programme, said the Expert Mechanism’s study showed that behind every discussion on finance were people — families, workers, and communities whose right to development depended on a stable climate and a healthy environment.  It showed that the way finance flowed, or failed to flow, determined whose resilience was built and whose vulnerability deepened.

The United Nations Environment Programme’s recently launched “State of Finance for Forests” report showed that most climate and forest spending still came from high-income countries, while tropical forest nations faced the highest protection costs and the least support.  This was both inefficient and unjust.  In addition, environmentally harmful subsidies still outweighed total global forest finance several times over.  Even as markets expanded, clearing land sometimes remained more profitable than conserving it.  People needed to be put at the centre of solutions to this issue.  Solutions needed to be based on free, prior and informed consent, recognition of land and carbon rights, and measures to ensure that communities had a real stake in the benefits.  When this happened, forests stood and livelihoods rose.

To drive real mitigation, forest carbon needed to be valued between 30 and 50 United States dollars per tonne of carbon dioxide.  However, most credits still traded far below that.  A fair price needed to reflect the true cost of conservation, the opportunity cost, long-term stewardship, and a premium for indigenous and community protection.  Mechanisms like long-term offtake agreements, blended finance, and public guarantees could stabilise prices and reduce risk for developing countries.

RAPHAEL DANGLADE, Africa-Europe Foundation, said Africa and Europe agreed that climate change was a defining global challenge of our time, threating lives, systems and economic stability world-wide, impacting the right to development.  Africa played a key role in the global climate response, with communities and ecosystems on the frontline of climate impacts and solutions. Europe, with 25 per cent of historical emissions and six per cent of emissions today, had a responsibility to address it.  Both had a role to play in advancing a new vision, geared towards shared prosperity and climate positive group.  This vision must ensure that Africa was not a passive supplier of cheap credits, but a supplier of quality carbon credits at a fair price.  It was important to build on the latest developments, including from the twenty-ninth Conference of Parties, to ensure the two continents could trade carbon on equal terms. 

Africa needed true demand to invest in its own carbon infrastructure.  Carbon pricing would play a critical role in the future.  It was time to expand the scope of cooperation in carbon markets and pricing between Africa and Europe.  The taskforce established by the European Union had a role to play in supporting existing initiatives and could ensure Africa did not miss out on the future of carbon pricing.  The African Integrity and Equality Principles for carbon markets set a new benchmark as Africa’s gold standard, and ensured that Africans carbon markets were fair and impactful.  As the thirtieth Conference of Parties approached, it was important for the European Union to identify and clarify European Union demand signals; support Africa’s institutional readiness; advance article 6 on foreign cooperation; align standards with equity; and build trust, transparency and clear market design. 

Comments from Members of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development

MIHIR KANADE, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said the recent Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on climate justice would better inform the draft report, which recognised that financial assistance and technology transfer were obligations of States and reinforced the duty to cooperate.  There was room in the study to highlight the limitations of carbon trading, which some studies predicted would not yield additional emissions reductions, as many credits generated by the system would have happened anyway.  Offset markets were also sometimes used as a form of “greenwashing” by major polluters.  A disproportionate amount of climate financing had gone to mitigation rather than adaptation. Many developing countries received financing for mitigation rather than adaptation, which was not in line with their needs.  Repurposing of such financing was rife and climate financing also led to inflation in some cases.

KLENTIANA MAHMUTAJ, Vice Chair of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, also referenced the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion, which addressed States’ obligation to regulate private actors’ activities.  Climate change could not be challenged by domestic or international courts alone. The report addressed the link between business activities, the right to development, and human rights.  There were concerns that revenues from carbon markets sometimes flowed more to corporations than to local communities. Governments needed to ensure that investments for carbon removal respected indigenous land access and tenure rights.

JUANA MARÍA IBAÑEZ RIVAS, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, further referenced the recent Advisory Opinion on climate justice issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which addressed access to justice and climate financing.  States’ incentives for combatting emissions needed to be strictly regulated.  The report needed to consider how to harness the knowledge of indigenous groups and consider the responsibility of businesses.

BONNY IBHAWOH, Chair of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said the Expert Mechanism needed to think about resource sharing, vulnerabilities and responsibilities.  Discussions on clean cooking initiatives drew attention to the lived experiences of many women in the Global South.  The report’s focus on illicit financial flows was also pertinent and related to recent discussions within the United Nations on developing a covenant on tax.  There was scope to consider illicit financial flows within the context of global tax reform.  Illicit financial flows could not be tackled if conduits for these flows were not addressed through tax reform.

Discussion

In the discussion, speakers, among other things, expressed concern about threats posed by climate change, including sea-level rise, stronger hurricanes and other natural disasters.  States had a duty to take all necessary measures to prevent foreseeable harm from climate change.  Speakers welcomed the views presented in the draft study, which focused on participation, transparency and sustainability.  One speaker welcomed the study’s call to embed right to development principles across all climate governance frameworks.

One speaker said the price of carbon offsets often did not reflect the real development cost for developing countries.  The speaker urged the Expert Mechanism to call for the urgent reform of the international financial architecture to support genuine climate action.

Some speakers said carbon market projects often exclusively benefited financial institutions and the private sector.  The land grabbing phenomenon had been incentivised by carbon markets.  They said free, prior and informed consent and access to information on development projects was needed, as was a complaints mechanism that allowed affected persons to tackle climate injustices. Indigenous peoples needed to fully participate in decision making on natural resources, and international legislation needed to be strengthened to ensure accountability for the private sector. Human rights impact assessments needed to be conducted.  There needed to be reform of taxation of transnational corporations, and subsidies provided to transnational corporations to exploit natural resources needed to be removed.

Responses and Closing Remarks

KATRINA HARINA BORROMEO, United Nations Environment Programme, said carbon markets had their limitations.  The world was at the tipping point; there was significant risk and the need to adapt. It was important to use every tool to address the lack of finance, including carbon finance.  Ms. Borromeo congratulated the team members who had conducted the study, which provided a balanced view.  The challenge was turning these findings into policy and practice. The study could benefit from a section on behaviour change from individuals, companies and communities. 

ISABELLE DURANT, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said the carbon market was a tool which could be beneficial.  Regulation was very important and there needed to be robust governance and oversight by independent bodies to ensure that carbon markets operated in transparency.  There needed to be price mechanisms and sharing of profits.   Indigenous peoples needed to be respected and protected from land grabbing.  It needed to be defined who was participating and under what conditions.  To combat greenwashing, it needed to be defined as who carried out the certification and who oversaw them, but this was complex.  The European Union had put in place a successful carbon market, which had seen a 50 per cent drop in polluting sectors.  Businesses had changed their practice, however, more for the price than due to a moral duty.  It was important to identify the mechanisms which could bring about behavioural change in corporations. 

There was an entire chapter in the study on blue carbon (carbon from the ocean), which was still a sector where more could be done for island States that were the most exposed to climate change.  In principle, Ms. Durant agreed with the concept of a human rights assessment on climate financing, however, its practical implementation raised more questions than answers.  Ms. Durant thanked everyone for their contributions and would adapt her draft according to their questions and comments. 

First Thematic Discussion: “How to Commemorate the Fortieth Anniversary of the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development: Reflections and Proposals”

Opening Statements

BONNY IBHAWOH, Chair of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said 40 years ago, in December 1986, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Right to Development — a visionary affirmation that development was not merely a matter of economic growth or technical progress, but a human right belonging to every person and all peoples.  As the fortieth anniversary of this landmark Declaration approached, the Expert Mechanism wished to commemorate its adoption and to renew its promise.  It did so in a world shaped by profound inequalities, persistent conflicts, and a climate emergency that threatened lives and livelihoods across generations.  The anniversary was a call to action; a moment to transform the right to development from principle to practice.

To ensure that the fortieth anniversary became a platform for global consensus and practical cooperation, it was imperative to reaffirm the right to development as central to the United Nations’ normative and operational agenda; to link the right with issues such as climate action, debt sustainability, and equitable access to technologies; and to build institutional and political momentum toward the adoption of a Convention on the Right to Development, which would restore trust in multilateralism and respond to the growing demand for a more equitable international order.

The journey of the right to development was, at its core, a story of human solidarity. Commemorations needed to elevate the voices of those who lived on the frontlines of inequality: women, indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, and vulnerable communities.  They needed to be guided by reflection on progress and challenges, and a concerted push toward the adoption of the Convention on the Right to Development.  Forty years on, the vision of the 1986 Declaration remained both urgent and unfinished.  The Expert Mechanism’s task was to make the right to development not a promise deferred but a reality delivered.

KLENTIANA MAHMUTAJ, Vice Chair of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said when the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Right to Development in 1986, it marked a turning point in the understanding of human rights and global justice.  It called for a fairer international economic order that recognised the sovereign equality of nations; reduced dependency; placed people, not profit, at the centre of progress; and linked the unfinished struggle for self-determination with the universal pursuit of human rights.  Most importantly, it declared that development was not a privilege, nor an act of charity, but a human right.  The right to development recognised that every human person and all peoples were entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural, and political development.  Development was both an individual and collective right, grounded in human dignity, justice and equality.  This was revolutionary.  For the first time, the world agreed that development was about people, not numbers. The Declaration also outlined that development must be done with people, not to them, and that development was a shared global responsibility. 

Since 1986, the right to development moved from aspiration towards recognition in global policy and law.  In 1993, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action reaffirmed the right to development as “an integral part of fundamental human rights,” which was a crucial moment.  Later, global agendas such as the Millennium Development Goals and the Sustainable Development Goals adopted many of its central principles: equity, participation, and international cooperation.  Two years ago, the Intergovernmental Working Group on the Right to Development completed the Draft International Covenant on the Right to Development, which was a historic step.  This draft covenant, now before the General Assembly, could one day stand alongside the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as the third pillar of the international human rights architecture.  All these developments highlighted that the right to development had reshaped the way States all thought about global policy. 

Yet, despite this progress, the Right to Development remained, for many, a promise unfulfilled.  Global inequalities persisted and had deepened.  Nearly 40 years on, the right to development endured as one of the most visionary ideas in international human rights law, reminding that the measure of progress was not how much wealth accumulated, but how much freedom, equality and justice were extended to others. 

MIHIR KANADE, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development by the General Assembly on 4 December 1986 was a watershed moment in the evolution of international human rights norms.  Its roots lay in the struggles of peoples of the newly independent countries in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, who had escaped the jaws of colonisation but were born into a hostile international, political, social, economic, and cultural order.  The Declaration was the first international instrument to describe development in terms of “improvement of the well-being of all individuals and peoples” and not purely in econometric terms.

In 2015, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted, but it needed to be operationalised based on the normative framework of development as a human right, and not the business-as-usual approach of development as charity or privilege.  This required a normative framework that treated international cooperation as a duty of States and not generosity or an option.  In its first thematic report, the Expert Mechanism highlighted how non-operationalisation of the right to development led to a tremendous stagnation and regression for most of the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals, especially those based on international cooperation.  Mr. Kanade called on United Nations Member States to adopt the Draft International Covenant on the Right to Development at the General Assembly this year, and to ensure that human rights impact assessments were conducted for their cooperation practices.

ISABELLE DURANT, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said more could be done when it came to achieving the right to development.  The context had changed in recent years and the Mechanism needed to take this transformation into account.  This could be through reports, additional sessions, visits, bilateral meetings, and international conferences.  More than ever, development was the cornerstone of multilateral dialogue. It was important to go beyond dependence to partnership in North-South cooperation.  Economies needed to be less dependent on imports and more dependent on local cooperation.  The financial architecture needed to be reformed, and economies needed to be less extractive, and better integrated into international trade chains. 

Integrating a just climatic transition as part of the development debate was vital.  The climate dimension was increasingly becoming an important lever of development, affecting all components of development.  Digital transformation needed to serve development.  Developed countries with these resources needed to end the high prices for developing countries that were importing these resources. The right to development could not be seen outside the local approach.  This enabled the inclusion of indigenous peoples, and their free, prior and informed participation.  The contribution of the right to development on peace and security could be further developed. 

JUANA MARÍA IBAÑEZ RIVAS, Member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said that while States remained the main duty bearers for the protection of the right to development, this protection also depended on the commitment and active engagement of non-State actors.  The Expert Mechanism’s reports had highlighted good practices that demonstrated the importance of cooperation, consultation and partnership between State and non-State actors, and among non-State actors themselves.  Ms. Ibañez Rivas highlighted the roles and obligations of civil society, national human rights institutions, the private sector, and the academic community in implementing the right to development.

The fortieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Right to Development offered an important opportunity to strengthen good practices among non-State actors, and to renew their commitment to this right at the national, regional, and global levels. For the Expert Mechanism, this meant ensuring stronger cooperation with non-State actors; taking part in awareness-raising activities on the content and scope of the right to development and the related obligations of States; and working with regional business organizations to raise awareness of the private sector’s responsibility in this area.  Each non-State actor had a role to play in ensuring the full recognition, enjoyment and realisation of the right to development.

MELIK OZDEN, Centre Europe-Tiers Monde, said next year, the world would celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development.  Although the Declaration constituted a roadmap for development policies in their entirety and was visionary in terms of the multidimensional crisis that humanity was going through, it was not being implemented.  Despite its strength, the Declaration on the Right to Development was often absent from political discourse and marginalised because of the global imposition of neo-liberal policies, presented as the solution to all the evils of humanity.  In this context, the concept of development was reduced solely to economic growth, achieved through a free market that would bring shared prosperity to all countries and all segments of the population.  The most worrying consequence of this was the rise of openly racist and xenophobic political parties, the militarisation of societies, and threats to democracy and human rights. 

To reach the populations most concerned, Centre Europe-Tiers Monde proposed the launch of a global campaign on the right to development on the occasion of this fortieth anniversary, in coordination with social movements and other civil society organizations, with States committed to the right to development and the relevant United Nations bodies, particularly the Expert Mechanism.  As the right to development was both individual and collective, such a campaign would give priority to those who had historically been excluded from development decision-making processes.  There were many activities which could be carried out, including creating manuals, radio broadcasts and plays in theatres, and organising conferences and workshops on the right to development.  The celebration of the fortieth anniversary of the right to development should not be a formal commemoration, but a catalyst for a broad reappropriation of this right by the popular strata and the right holders. 

Discussion

In the discussion, speakers, among other things, welcomed the work of the Expert Mechanism and the planned commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Right to Development in 2026, which was a unique opportunity for reflection and renewed commitment to ensure the right to development.  One speaker also commended the complementary work of the Intergovernmental Working Group on the Right to Development and the Special Rapporteur on the right to development.

Several speakers raised concerns about global issues inhibiting the realisation of the right to development, including increasing inequality, poverty, debt, the climate crisis, the digital divide, security threats, the persecution of migrants, and the impact of unilateral coercive measures.  Inequality led to a lack of access to health, education, housing, safe water, mental health, and justice for vulnerable populations, one speaker noted.  These challenges highlighted the need for coordinated, human rights-based responses from the international community promoting the right to development.  One speaker raised concerns about cuts to development assistance funding, which had impacted programmes combatting AIDS and supporting persons affected by conflict, and called for this funding to be restored.

One speaker said future reforms to the World Trade Organization and the United Nations Development Programme should not ignore the right to development, while another called on the Expert Mechanism to focus future work on the negative impacts of unilateral coercive measures.  Some speakers said the Expert Mechanism needed to reiterate the principles of the United Nations Charter, including respect for sovereignty, the self-determination of peoples, and the right to development, and needed to promote the enactment of the draft Convention on the Right to Development.  One speaker expressed hope that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ work on the right to development would be shielded from funding restraints.

Various speakers presented planned policies and measures to promote the right to development and achieve sustainable development, including planned international conferences on the right to development, human rights, new technologies, and unilateral coercive measures; and programmes promoting increased social protection, development of vulnerable rural areas, increased health and education budgets, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and the economic empowerment of women and youth.  Some speakers presented funds and other initiatives to promote development in least-developed countries, strengthen institutional and statistical capacities, and promote research on the right to development.  A number of speakers also pledged to promote the adoption of a binding legal instrument recognising the right to development as an inalienable human right.  One speaker proposed developing a global plan of action on the right to development up to 2030, and integrating the right to development into emerging global agendas on artificial intelligence and climate financing.

_______________

Ce document produit par le Service de l’information des Nations Unies à Genève est destiné à l'information ; il ne constitue pas un document officiel.

Les versions anglaise et française de nos communiqués sont différentes car elles sont le produit de deux équipes de couverture distinctes qui travaillent indépendamment.

HRC25.012E