Report meeting on the Tribunal on Ecological Debt 14/10/2004 NEF London

Participants:

Leida, Geert (Belgium),  Aurora (Ecuador), Vinod (India), Tatiana (Colombia), Miquel, Iolanda (Spain), Jaro (Italy), Jan (Holland), Andrew, Feja (UK), Demba (Senegal), Athena (Philippines), Gualter (Portugal), Teresa, Tara (Scotland). 

Agenda:
9.30           	Welcome and objectives of the day 
9.45            	Presentation of participants
10.00           Coffee/tea - break
10.30   	Reactions and comments on the draft project proposal of the Tribunal. 

12.00   Lunch

14.00   	Integration of reactions in the draft project proposal
15.30           Decisions of future work (including formation of core-group)
16.30           Division of tasks – action plan
17.00           Appointment for next meeting

Organisations present here are part of international networks : 
SPEDCA : Southern Peoples Ecological Debt Creditors Alliance
JUBILEE SOUTH : Southern network on External Debt
JADES : Justicia Ambiental, Deuda Ecológica y Sostentabilidad
ENRED : European Network for the Recognition of Ecological Debt
FoeI: Friends of the Earth International

Brainstorming and discussion

What are the target audiences we will focus on?
•	Importance of an adequate communication strategy in order to maximize the effect of the Tribunal.
•	We should consider using audio-visual means (video, radio) during the preparation phase towards the tribunal and during the tribunal to be used in the awareness raising afterwards. 
•	Make use of the tribunal to reveal some related research.
•	Our message must be clear, and therefore the cases must be good and illustrative.

How can we involve the debtors in the tribunal? IFIs, ECAs, TNCs?
•	In the case of the Debt Tribunal in Porto Alegre, the accused (World Bank) didn’t show up. After the Tribunal, there was given a couple of months to them to defend themselves. Finally, the verdict and the sentence was delivered at the office of the World Bank in New York.
•	On the tribunal on Ecological Debt in Quito, the WB was invited. They send a letter, which was read during the tribunal.
•	The right to defence must be guaranteed.

Confrontation vs. Reconciliation
•	There is a tension between these approaches.
•	The emphasis should be on recognition and reparation, not on compensation.
•	Changing consumption and production patterns as part of a strategy of avoiding future accumulation of ecological debt is an important aspect. 
•	To make it a political event, it is important to show a way out.
•	Problem solving approach can be part of the process. 
•	There can be a tension between a general ‘principle-based’ approach and a more pragmatic approach in the field. 

The importance of a global process
•	The building up towards the Tribunal through the process of regional assemblies is fundamental. 
•	It can be an instrument to involve and to empower southern civil society and to spread the concept of ecological debt.

The place and the venue : Brussels? European Parliament?
•	Brussels is a symbolic place as the headquarters of the EU and as the capital of a former colonial regime. It is crucial to make use of the symbolic aspects of place and venue. 
•	The cases presented in Brussels should have a clear an undeniable link with Europe (e.g. European companies or European policies). 
•	The European Parliament is an appropriate venue to focus on European policy makers. Collaboration of some MEPs might be necessary. The organisers have to be in the condition to maintain their own independence.

The ‘legal and juridical architecture’ of the Tribunal
•	The state legal system is a product of colonisation and suppression. Can’t we use alternative forms (e.g. based on indigenous traditions)
•	However, if we want to influence policy making, we should use a language policy makers understand.
•	The Jubilee South Tribunal on Debt (Porto Alegre, 2002) was an interesting experience
•	It is important to distinguish between tribunal and charges. The tribunal must provide an ‘objective neutral framework’ to present the ‘well elaborated cases’. The reliability of the argumentation in the cases and the ‘neutrality of the space’ in the framework of the tribunal should add force and credibility to the outcome (verdict/sentence) of the tribunal. However, the board of lawyers involved should only have a advisory technical role. 
•	The charges must be good elaborated and well-founded. The accusers could be well-known people with a record on related issues and a certain a certain charisma. Local victims should present evidence, eventually complemented with evidence of northern witnesses and illustrated by a video etc..
•	We could invite observers to the tribunal : UN-people, 

Ecological debt within the North?
•	The message is clearer if we focus on North-south relations. 
•	Of course, there are a lot of cases of environmental injustice in the north, but there is the additional dimension of resource flows and the historical accumulation of wealth  in the case of N/S ecological debt.
•	A good suggestion is to involve northern witnesses (victims of ecological injustice in the north, caused by the same actors as in the ‘southern case’) 
•	Anyway, if there is an interesting case of ‘ecological debt’ (e.g. Russian policy vs former soviet republics) and a good discussion at the grass roots, the tribunal could consider handling it. 
•	This will become clear during the process of defining the criteria. 

Direct outcome of the tribunal
•	Verdict/sentence concerning each case presented
•	An outcome addressed to policy makers, e.g. a Resolution in the European Parliament

Southern peoples must have a leading role
•	The political aspect is very important
•	However, it is not an objective to divide the peoples of the north and the south.
•	The NGOs present in Brussels should look after practical questions

Glossary
•	During the process, only some cases will be elaborated in the context of regional assemblies and the tribunal. But it is important to collect information on all cases to compose a ‘glossary’. (e.g. the book ‘Victims of Development : Asian cases)

Funding
•	The independency of the organisers must be guaranteed.
•	Not all funding should come from official sources (cfr. Funding discussion on WSF)
•	National expenses should be covered by national actors
•	Regional assemblies : WCC will surely contribute, additional funding will be necessary
•	Tribunal : EU, DG (Environment/Development?)
•	Discussion process: The objective of the JADES budget is to support the conceptual discussion on the concept ecological debt. However, it should be possible to reorient the budget in order to support this process, because there will be a lot of discussion on the concept ecological debt and the selected items during this process.
•	If themes will be defined, some thematic organisations might be interested to contribute.

Some practical decisions
•	Time and place of tribunal : December 2006, Brussels
•	Regional assemblies : final 2005 
•	Thematic approach instead of geographical approach – we should select 4 themes – 2 coordinators for each theme.
•	Own mailing list and website : Gualter (will take care of this)
•	Integrate the discussions of this meeting in the project proposal (Leida)
•	Contact EC (funding), (Leida)
•	Contact Jades and rewrite the project of Jades, integrating more the Tribunal and four discussions papers we will write (Leida)
•	WCC will decide on if and how they will support the process in the South
•	Composition of core coordination group on the tribunal
•	Athena (WCC)
•	Aurora (SPEDCA)
•	Malcolm (SPEDCA)
•	Vinod (Jubilee South)
•	Gualter (ENRED)
•	Leida (JADES)
•	Theresa (FoeI)

Looking for more information
•	Jubilee South : on the organisation and outcomes on the Tribunal on Debt : Demba & Athena
•	Tribunal on Ecological Debt in Quito : Tatiana, Aurora
•	Permanent Peoples Tribunal (office in Rome) : Leida contact via Jaro
•	Judges for sustainable development : Goldstone via Jan Juffermans

Varia
•	Within some months, there will be a meeting on IFIs and reparation in South Africa. 
•	More information : Jaro
•	Next meeting: depending on the development of different things. WSF is maybe too early ? Regional meeting – we don’t know yet ?